1. ' MRS. QAISAR IQBAL, J.---The applicants named above are connected in Crime No,66 of 2006, registered at Police Station Qazi Ahmed under section 382, P.P.C. Read with section 20 of Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. ' Precisely the facts leading to the case are that complainant Ghulam Mustafa Rind lodged a report on 7-5-2006 at 2300 hours alleging that he is running a grocery shop. On the night on 1-5-2006 he along with his brother Ghulam Murtaza, cousin Haji Ghulam Nabi were sleeping in front of his shop, on the 'Lalkara' of the assailants, they were identified in Electric Bulb light, as Nazir Ahmed, Bashir Ahmed armed with guns, Muhammad Khan, Manu and Naseer Ahmed armed with pistols along with unidentified assailants duly armed extended abuses to the complainant, on account of fear complainant handed over keys to Nazir, they took away cash and articles lying in the shop, complainant reported the matter to the Nekmard Haji Muhammad Uris for return of his articles comprising of cash of Rs,20,000 and other articles lying in the shop, but of no avail.
3. ' Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that first information report was lodged after delay of 6/7 days from the date of occurrence, no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicants after their arrest, the applicants have been involved in the commission of crime on account of the past enmity, present case is counter blast to F.I.R. No,112 of 2006 under sections 324, 337-A(iii), 337-F(I), 337-L (ii), 504, 147 and 148, P.P.C. Registered against the complainant from the side of the applicants, thus with the mala fide object, the case has been registered against the applicants.
4. ' Learned A.A.-G. Has contended that no recovery has been effected from the possession of the applicants' Manu alias Manthar, Naseer Ahmed and Bashir Ahmed whereas the alleged stolen property was secured from the possession of the applicant Nazir Ahmed comprising of cash and Marvin Cigarettes as well as from the possession of co-accused Muhammad Khan, therefore, he has conceded to the grant of bail to the applicants except Nazir Ahmed.
5. ' I have considered the arguments advanced at the bar. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicants Manu alias Manthar, Naseer and Bashir Ahmed. There are vague allegations against the applicants for participation in the commission of crime, the looted cash and bundle of Cigarettes were not recovered from their possession, they are entitled to the concession of bail.
6. ' Accordingly, they are directed to be released on bail upon furnishing surety in the sum of I: s.100,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand) each and P.R. Bond the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Whereas the case of the applicant Nazir Ahmed is not identical as a part of robbed property was secured from his possession, therefore, concession of bail is not extended in his favour at this stage. Consequently, the bail plea of applicant Nazir Ahmed is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to record the evidence of material witnesses, the applicant shall be at liberty to file fresh bail application.