1. The complainant Muhammad Hasil lodged first information report in 1-5-2000 at 20-55 hours at Police Station Baiji Sharif being Crime No. 18 of 2000 stating therein that he owns a tractor. On the night of incident he was coming alongwith Maqsood and Muhammad Qasim Malik on tractor to his village. At about 8-30 p.m. They were stopped by three persons near village Noraja on Link Road Pano Akil. The complainant party had seen them and stated that they would be able to identify them on seeing them. One was armed with gun, another has pistol in his hand whereas third one was armed with Lathi. They robbed Rs.1,140, duty card and identity card on gunpoint. They robbed Rs.630 cash from Maqood A.I. The culprit armed with Lathi tried to rob Muhammad Qasim but he disclosed that he had nothing in his pocket. On his saying so the culprit who was armed with gun fired from his gun at Muhammad Qasim who on receipt of gunshot injuries fell down. The complainant and P.W. Maqsood A.I raised cries which attracted Allahdad and other villagers. The culprits on seeing them managed to escape from the scene of offence. The complainant party went near injured Muhammad Qasim and immediately removed him to Police Station and lodged the first information report. The injured succumbed to the injuries on the next day. First information report, as such, was converted into section 302, P.P.C.
2. The police after registration of first information report took up investigation and arrested the present applicant on 3-5-2000. The identification parade was arranged and T.T. Pistol, cash of Rs.630 and identity card of deceased Muhammad Qasim was recovered from him.
3. Mr. Nuruddin Sarki, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was arrested on 3-5-2000 and the identification test was held on 4-5-2000 before the Judicial Magistrate through P.Ws. Complainant, Allahdad and Maqsood A.I. The recovery of T.T. Pistol, cash of Rs.630 and the identity card of deceased was effected from him on 16-5-2000. The learned counsel submitted that affidavits are filed by some persons wherein they have stated that the applicant was with them on 1-5-2000 for 4-00 p.m. To 3-30 p.m. It is argued that certain interpolations have been made in the Mashirnama wherein arrest is shown to be 3-5-2000 instead of 2-5-2000. The Mashirs of arrest are relatives of the complainant. The investigation was transferred on the application of complainant from ordinary police to Crime Branch Sukkur on 25- 5-2000. It is submitted that description and features of the culprits have not been mentioned in the first information report. It is stated that the P.Ws. While identifying the culprits have not ascribed their roles in the commission of the crime. The complainant and the accused are residing at the distance of two kilometres and that they were already known to each other. Complainant is police constable and so also P.W. Maqsood A.I, complainant is said to be previous convict, such copy of the. Judgment is filed. It is argued that accused is student and his case requires further enquiry as contemplated by section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Reliance has been placed upon the cases reported as Muhammad Yaqoob and another V. The State (1989 PCr.LJ 2227), Muhammad Rafique v. The State (1991 PCr.LJ 857), Mehmood Ahmed and 3 others v. The State and another (1995 SCMR 125) and Ghulam Rasool v. The State (1988 SCM R 557).
4. Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar, learned A.A.-G. For State has opposed the bail plea of the accused on the ground that accused was arrested on 3-5-2000 and on 4-5-2000 he was put to identification test and the complainant Muhammad Hasil, Maqsood A.I and Allahdad rightly picked him out from the parade. On 16-5-2000 pistol was recovered from him. Identity card of deceased and cash of Rs.630 was also recovered from his possession.
5. Mr. Abdul Fattah Malik, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has argued that the accused has committed highway robbery. He was rightly picked out by complainant and the witnesses in identification test. The T.T. Pistol as well as robbed property was recovered from the possession of accused. It is stated that the deeper appreciation at this stage is not permitted under the law.
6. The perusal of record reveals that this is a highway robbery on gunpoint. The accused was arrested after two days and T.T. Pistol as well as robbed property viz. Identity card of deceased and cash of Rs.630 'was recovered from his possession. The accused was put to identification test on the next day of his arrest and he was correctly picked out by complainant Muhammad Hasil, P.Ws. Maqsood A.I and Allahdad. All the formalities were fulfilled before holding identification least. The complainant and the prosecution witnesses have no animosity to implicate the accused in false case. The case is fresh which has not yet proceeded. The offence is heinous one and is covered by prohibitory clause contained under section 497(1), Cr.P.C. The technicalities are not to be looked into at this stage and deeper appreciation is not permitted under the law at bail stage. The police had examined certain witnesses in defence of the accused who have sworn their affidavits wherein they have stated that the accused at the time of incident were with them. It appears that police in order to spoil the prosecution case adopted this way of investigation and examined certain defence witnesses which could hardly be the job of police to act in this fashion at investigation stage. The complainant due to these reasons got the investigation transferred, from ordinary police to Crime Branch. The names of these witnesses were not mentioned in the F.I.R. And the police had unnecessarily examined those witnesses. The highway robberies on gunpoint are nowadays r pant and , have made the life miserable. '
7. Under these circumstances, it cannot be held at this stage that there appear no reasonable.
8. Grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty of the offence with which he is charged and his case requires further enquiry. Hence the bail plea of accused is hereby rejected.