SH. NAJAM-UL-HASSAN, J. - Through this petition the petitioners have sought post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 70/2010, dated 19.07.2010 for the offence under sections 395/412, PPC registered Police Station Dullay Wala, District Bhakkar.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioners is that he alongwith eight other co-accused cut the government trees and loaded the same in the truck and took away the same while restraining the government officials, as such the case was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the very outset contend four of the co-accused of the petitioner were allowed bail by this vide order dated 14.09.2010 passed in Crl. Misc. No. 9809-B/2010.
It is further contended that the bail application of the co-accused was allowed mainly on the grounds that the petitioners in that petition were hired by the main culprit only to load the wood. It is submitted that even petitioner No. 1 is the driver of the truck and petitioner No. 2 is the conductor and they were hired by the main accused just to transport the wood and it was not in the knowledge of the petitioners that the wood was the stolen property, as such they cannot be held responsible for the offence and even under the principle of consistency petitioners are entitled to bail.
On the other hand, learned DPG while opposing the bail application contends that petitioners are named in the FIR; they have committed a heinous offence and took away the government wood, as such the petitioners are not entitled to any relief.
4. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. Statedly petitioner No. 1 is the driver of the truck whereas petitioner No. 2 is the conductor of the truck in which the wood was being transported. The main accused is behind the bars; investigation has been completed; petitioners are no more required for further investigation. I have been informed that the petitioners are not the record holders and there is no other case registered against them. As the matter regarding the involvement of the petitioner for the commission of dacoity needs further probe and it can only be ascertained by the learned Trial Court after recording of evidence as to whether the petitioners had any common intention alongwith the other accused. In these circumstances, to keep the petitioners behind the bars would not serve any purpose. Even otherwise, on the principle of consistency the petitioners are entitled to bail as the co-accused who were the loaders were allowed bail by this Court. Consequently this petition is accepted and petitioners are admitted to post arrest bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.