' The petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,73, dated 19-2-2012, under sections 324, 353, 186, P.P.C: read with section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act. 1997 and section 13 of Pakistan. Arms Ordinance No,XX of 1965, registered at Police Station Mochiwala, District Jhang.
2. Precisely, the prosecution case as narrated by Muhammad Ayub, Inspector/SHO is that some accused aboard Car No,707-LE committed dacoity at a shop of mobile phones in Bhowana, whereafter ,they headed-towards Mang: on this infOrmation, he along with fellow police officials set off from the police station to erect a barricade; a little while thereafter, he received a wireless message that six armed accused were seated in the said car, which was 'being chased by Iqbal Javed, ASI; in the meanwhile, another message was received by him from Iqbal Javed, ASI etc. That an encounter with the accused had begun at Adda Khoi and they asked for re-enforcement as accused were armed with latest weaponry and also used rocket launchers; on receipt of this information, the complainant joined by some other police officials reached the place of occurrence and found a multitude of the police officials present there, who informed him that two of the outlawed had been killed in cross firing while rest -four fled towards link road Chak No,441/JB; the runaway accused were given a hot pursuit by the police and after another round of shooting between the parties, two of the dacoits Mansha and Habib alias Bao (petitioner) were overpowered in injured condition; their weapons were taken custody of by the police;, the injured accused disclosed the names of their companions, having made good their escape as Naqqash alias Kashi and Tanvir alias Teero; they also disclosed the identity of the deceased accused as Shahid alias Mochha and Tanvir Qasim; heavy arms and ammunition were recovered by the police from near the dead bodies of the dacoits.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is observed that the story contained in the F.I.R. Apparently seems preposterous as well as exaggerative. Six heavily armed criminals allegedly showered missiles at the police party on more than one occasion and encounter between the parties spanned over many a miles, but none of 'the scores of the police officials taking part in the ever- A lengthening encounter, did not receive even a single scratch, which causes eyebrow-raising. The necropsy reports of the deceased reveal that both of them had been fired at and killed from their back. If the accused had pitched themselves at war with the police, the entry wounds on the posterior of the bodies of the deceased negate the very story of the police of an eyeball to eyeball encounter between the sides. It has been stated at bar by the learned counsel that right leg of the petitioner stood amputated because of the injuries received by him at the hands of the police and he had been rendered disabled for the rest of his life. The number of causalities and the number of persons falling wounded at the spot leave a big question mark on the claim of the complainant regarding a 'real encounter' between them and the accused.
A gang of armed bandits despite being in possession of lethal weapons sustained such a heavy loss, without causing any damage to the men-in-uniform which is very hard to digest even at the bail stage. It appears that something had been purposely hidden by the prosecution so as to build up a story, which could fit in with their tall claims regarding a ferocious and fearsome encounter of the 'titans'. The probability cannot he out rightly ruled out that the petitioner had been involved in this case as a matter of calculated move on the part of the police. The investigation stands, completed and petitioner is no more required for the purpose of investigation as challan against him stands submitted. Before the trial Court vide case diary dated 3-3-2012.
4. Resultantly, we accept this application and admit the petitioner' to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lacs only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.