MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ, J. - The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 93, dated 16.3.2010 under Sections 392 and 411, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Mangtanwala, District Nankana Sahib.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. And he is behind the bars since 24.5.2010 without any substantive, progress in his trial; that there is no previous criminal record against the petitioner and his case is at par with the case of his co- accused Muhammad Habib who has already been allowed bail by this Court vide Order dated 30.11.2010 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 12785-B of 2010. Further contends that recovery memo, of mobile phone does not contain any serial number of the mobile phone and recovery shown against the petitioner of one ring, mobile phone and pistol is fabricated, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for bail.
3. On the other hand learned Deputy Prosecutor General while vehemently opposing this bail petition contends that case of the petitioner is distinguishable than that of his co-accused Muhammad Habib to the extent of recovery, as recovery of mobile phone is sufficient evidence that connects him with the crime. Further contends that the offence against the petitioner is heinous in nature, hence, he is not entitled for bail.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Be that as it may, the petitioner is behind the bars since 24.5.2010 without any substantive progress in his trial. The investigating officer present in Court confirms that there is no previous criminal record against the petitioner. Co-accused of the petitioner namely Muhammad Habib has already been allowed bail by this Court on 20.11.2010 vide Criminal Miscellaneous No. 12785-B of 2010 and case of the petitioner is almost at par with the case of his co-accused Muhammad Habib.
In this view of the matter, case of the petitioner falls within sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C.
And is one of further inquiry into his guilt. I, therefore, admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 100000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.
6. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition.