' SAYED IFYIKHAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--- Muhammad Iqbal petitioner has sought post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 294 of 2012 dated 16-6-2012 registered under sections 395/412, P.P.C. At Police Station Jahanian District Khanewal.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his co-accused while armed with fire arms, robbed Muhammad Hanif and Muhammad Shafique who were taking the container containing 1380 grinding and cutting discs belonging to the complainant valuing Rs,65,00,000 in the area of Police Station Jahanian District Khanewal.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the case against the petitioner is false and concocted one; that he is not the nominated accused of the F.I.R. And he has been implicated in this case on the basis of supplementary statement of the complainant wherein no source of information has been mentioned except that the petitioner was arrested in another case and certain recoveries had been effected from him;, that the petitioner was not put to the test of identification parade; that the alleged recovery is fake one; that the petitioner is behind the bars since 2-8-2012 and the investigation of the case is complete and he is entitled to the concession of bail.
4. On the other hand learned DPG assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this petition and it is contended that the petitioner was identified by the complainant at police station, who admitted his guilt at that time and. Certain recoveries have also been effected from him; sufficient incriminating evidence is available on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of offence, therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned D.P.G. For the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant and have perused the record.
6. The petitioner is not the nominated accused of the F.I.R. And has been implicated in this case through the supplementary statement which was made after about three weeks of the occurrence wherein no specific source of information has been mentioned. The complainant himself was not robbed rather he was informed by drivers Muhammad Hanif and Muhammad Shafique about the alleged occurrence whereas the complainant saw the petitioner at Police Station Waryam District Jhang where the petitioner allegedly admitted about the commission of offence and certain recoveries had already been effected from him. No description of the petitioner has been given in the F.I.R. And he was put to the test of identification parade. The complainant himself had not seen petitioner at the time of occurrence, then how he had allegedly identified him at the police station as culprit of his case. There is no statement of the drivers Muhammad Hanif and Muhammad Sharif P.Ws. On record that they have identified the petitioner as the person who robbed them, therefore, the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry.
' Therefore, the petition in hand is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,200,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.