' Muhammad Aslam alias Ashraf is accused in case F.I.R. No,59, dated 8-3-1990 under section 17 of Ordinance VI of 1979 registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Gujranwala. According to F.I.R., the petitioner alongwith co-accused trespassed into the house of the complainant; looted cash, golden ornaments, prize bonds and forcibly took away car Toyota Corolla No,9767.
2. In support of the petition, learned counsel vehemently contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been involved in the case due to mala fides; co-accused of the petitioner except Baber who is stated to be murdered in a police encounter, have been released on bail and as such on the rule of consistency, the petitioner is also entitled to the concession of bail. He next submitted that in the identification parade, the petitioner was never identified by the complainant and as such there is not an iota of evidence to involve the petitioner with the commission of offence. It was also urged that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last one year and as no recovery is to be affected from him, no useful purpose will be served by keeping him in jail.
3. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition. According to him, the petitioner is involved in a case of heinous nature and also remained absconder which fact alone is sufficient to disentitled him from the concession of bail.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the police file. The petitioner prima facie appears to be a member of group of dacoits as one of his co-accused namely Baber alias Babri has been killed in a police encounter. The case was registered in the year 1990 but the petitioner was arrested on 5-5-1994; remained proclaimed offender for all such period. No doubt, merely on the ground of being proclaimed offender, bail cannot be refused but in the instant case it would amount to giving premium to the dacoit, if he is allowed the concession of bail. The tendency of committing dacoities in daylight has attained alarming situation and needs to be curbed with iron hand. Further learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to point out any mala fides either on the part of the complainant or the police. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner. His application is accordingly dismissed.