1. ABDUL HADI KHOSO, J.---This is Criminal Bail Application filed by Naeem-ur-Rehman Khan Niazi, the present applicant. The facts of the case are that the F.I.R No. 435 of 2010 under sections 395/324/170/34, P.P.C. Was lodged by complainant Noor Muhammad against the present applicant at Police Station Aziz Bhatti, Gulshan-eIqbal Town, Karachi. The complainant has lodged the F.I.R on 31-7-2010 for the incident of 24-7-2010 at 11:45 that he had met with the applicant accused on 19-7- 2010 on his House No. B-70 in connection with his business for purchase of TV, LCD and Laptop computers. The accused had informed him that he is customs officer and is incharge of auction, and the accused had taken him to customs house at airport, where he entered inside of the office and had told the complainant to stay there. After some time he came back and asked the complainant to arrange for money as he will deliver the items from his house. On which the complainant informed that he has arranged the money. The accused Naeem-ur-Rehman took him to his house for delivery of TV, LCD and Laptop computer. The complainant had accompanied him along with his friend namely Abbas, servant and his paternal uncle namely Haroon. It was time about 11:45 hours on 24-7-2010 at the house of Naeem-urRehman who had got them to sit in drawing room and in the meantime sons of the present applicant namely Hamood-ur-Rehman, Tanzeel-ul-Rehman, Ibad-ur-Rehman and his wife Samina came there. The complainant asked the applicant that he has arranged the money in the sum of Rs. 9,00,000 for the items LCD, TV and Laptop take the aforesaid amount and give delivery of the things. At that time the accused called his two gunmen and his sons who put arms upon them and made straight fire upon the complainant with intention to kill him, from the TT pistol, but the complainant fell down and saved his life, they snatched the cash of Rs. 9,00,000 from him and refused to deliver the items as agreed and issued threats that if he demanded items or amount, then he will be killed, therefore leave the place silently. Due to fear of death he along with his friend Abbas and servant and his uncle went away from the said place. Few days he was mentally disturbed, and thereafter on. 31-7-2010 he lodged the F.I.R. Against the present applicant, his sons and wife. The arrest of the accused is shown on 31-7-2010 and thereafter his sons and wife are stated to have been arrested and they are in police custody.
2. Mr. Khawaja Naveed, Advocate for the applicant accused states that there is no explanation of delay of 7 days in lodging the F.I.R. And the place of incident is shown as the personal bungalow of the accused where it is alleged that the complainant along with his other companions had gone there, the police station is at the distance of one and half kilometer and the whole family is involved in the case and the applicant is also cancer patient, the medical record of the applicant since year 2002 to 2004 is placed on record. Thee learned counsel further argues that there is no any dacoity or robbery case but at the most it will be case of failed business transaction, the applicant is not previously convicted, due to dispute of money the applicant and his whole family has been involved in the case and prayed for grant of bail on the ground that the case of applicant is of further inquiry.
3. On the other hand the three learned counsel for the complainant as well as APG for the State have opposed the bail application on the ground that there are so many cases pending against the present applicant accused as he is a habitual offender and notorious person, if he will be released on bail he will abscond or he will cheat more people and case comes under the prohibitory clause, and the complainant has applied for constitution of medical board to examine the accused as he has falsely claimed to be patient and having the danger to his life by remaining in jail.
4. I have heard both the sides and have gone through the record of the case. The fact that the complainant himself had gone to the house of the accused and then the whole family, the sons, the servants and the wife of the accused participated in the incident and the allegation that the complainant had brought Rs. 9,00,000 which were snatched from him and attempt was made to commit his murder does not appeal at this stage of the case to the common prudence of a man, there might be some money dispute between the parties but it appears very unnatural that a person has been robbed by the inmates of the house and the complainant was so simple that he got Rs. 9,00,000 to hand over for purchasing something not from a shopping centre or a market but from the house of private person. All these facts strike my mind, in my view the case of the applicant appears to be of further inquiry. I grant bail to the applicant accused on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 and P.R Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The observation made in this order is of tentative nature and will not affect the fate of the case.
5. Application disposed of.