It is an application for bail after arrest in a case under section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance VI, 1979. The allegation against the petitioners was that they robbed the complainant of money to the tune of Rs. 350; purse and wrist watch after sunset on a highway at pistol point.
2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that there was no mention in the F. I. R. Of any claim on the part of the informant that he was able to identify the assailants ; that there was no identification parade ; and that the record did not speak much as to how after all they were arrested, According to him, at best it was a case of recovery of stolen property failing under section 411, P. P. C. Rather than Harabah invoked by the police. He adds that for making it Harabah, the total value of the stolen `t property should have been at least equal to the market-value of 4.457 grants of gold, which it was not. Besides, it was argued that each one of the petitioners was supposed to have completed the Nisab ; that so far the, police had done nothing to evaluate the stolen property to make it a case of Harabah and lastly that at least two witnesses were required for it which were also lacking.
3. Although some other criminal cases are said to be pending against the petitioners, yet we have to confine ourselves to the facts of the present case particularly because so far there has been no conviction. Both the petitioners are allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 5,000 (rupees five thousand only, each with one surety in the like sum each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
4. Copy dasti on usual charges.