' MIFTAH-UD-DIN KHAN, J.---Petitioner, Jamshed Ali, was allowed bail by learned Senior Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate Karak on 12-7-2010 in case F.I.R. No, 391 dated 24-11-2009 of Police Station Karak but the same order was recalled by the learned Sessions Judge Karak on 16-8-2010, therefore, petitioner has applied for bail before this Court through instant petition.
2. Messrs Sifat Ali Khan and Tufail Muhammad, Advocates, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no recovery of the stolen honey has been made from the possession of the petitioner and that the other co-accused, from whom the recovery has been made, has been released on bail. They further submitted that the only evidence against the petitioner is the statement of co-accused Nawab Khan, who has already been released on bail, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the concession of bail.
3. The bail petition was opposed by the Ms. Surayya Jabeen, Advocate, learned counsel for the State as well as Messrs Eid Muhammad Khattak, Qasam Khattak and Malik Manzoor, Advocates, learned counsel for the complainant on the ground that the case of the petitioner is not at par with co-accused Nawab Khan, who has been released on the basis of compromise; that the petitioner is not only charged by the co-accused Nawab Khan but Ghulam Khan, complainant, has also charged him in his statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. And that the petitioner remained absconder for 6/7 months, therefore, without giving an explanation in the trial Court, tentatively the petitioner is connected with an offence covered by the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C, disentitling him to the concession of bail.
4. At bail stage, deep appraisal of evidence is not desirable but only tentative assessment of available facts on record has to be taken into an account. The petitioner has been nominated by owner of honey namely, Ghulam Khan, in his statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. For forcibly snatching away the same and recovery of snatched honey has been made from co-accused, Nawab Khan, who in his confessional statement has charged the present petitioner, who also remained fugitive from law for 6/7 months which has to be explained during the trial, therefore, in the given circumstances, the petitioner is prima facie connected with the offence covered by the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail. The present bail petition is dismissed.