The petitioner Nauman Zaman seeks bail after-arrest in case FIR No, 31/08 dated 25.1.2008 for offence under Section 392 PPC .registered at Police Station Sadar Wazirabad, District Gujranwala.
2. According to the FIR, on 23.1.2008 the complainant was weling on a car and no sooner did reach near Sadokhi in another car receipted and the petitioner along with his co-accused on gun-point d to the complainant and PWs. The complainant and PWs were tied and were thrown near the bridge.
The petitioner and his co-accused took along with them the car and other valuable articles.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant and witnesses have not supported the case against the petitioner, that the complainant had filed an affidavit in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge; that the complainant along with the witnesses are in attendance with their affidavits deposing therein that the case against the petitioner was lodged on suspicion. According to their satisfaction, he is innocent and has no objection for grant of bail.
4. Conversely, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General opposed all these grounds.
5. Heard. According to the result of investigation, recovery of pistol and cash amount was effected.
The occurrence, as recorded in the FIR, had taken place, in awful manner. The recovery provides a confirmatory link with the offence. The petitioner and his co-accused looted the amount by show of force. The petitioner and his co-accused are the residents of District Jehlum. whereas the occurrence has been committed at 4.00 p;m. in the area of Kamonke, District Gujranwala. The petitioner appears to be hardened criminal. The filing of affidavits by the complainant 'and witnesses excluding the petitioner from the occurrence, is not a valid ground to enlarge him on bail.
The reason is that dathits usually have a net-work and their aides invariably put pressure on the complainant to withdraw from the case. The offence being not compoundable, the value of affidavit of the complainant, if at all sworn by him, would be more appropriately tested in course of trial when prosecution will also have an opportunity to cross-examine him and to contradict him with the FIR. At this stage, I am not prepared to attach any value to the alleged affidavits of the PWs or that of the complainant. The offence in which the petitioner is involved shakes the human conscience. Grant of bail would amount to trivialize and play down the gravity of the offence. Since it is a non-compoundable offence, the value of the affidavits to shift from the earlier version as contained in third statements to the police, would be tested in the course of trial. On the other hand; it also appears that the accused are tampering with the prosecution evidence. The petitioner appears to be a criminal with considerable clout. He is not entitled to bail. His application is dismissed.