' Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,177 dated 22-6-2000 registered at Police Station Airport, Rawalpindi under sections 392/412, P.P.C. Read with section 17 of Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant reported that he was present at his house with other inmates of the house and at about 11-20 a.m. On the call of bell Abuzar driver of the complainant informed him that the visitor is a friend of Zubair brother of complainant residing in Canada and has come from Lahore from condolence of death of his mother. Asim brother of complainant asked his driver to make all the four guests to it in the Drawing Room who was aged 25 to 30 years each. The description of the accused has been mentioned in the F.I.R. The moment they entered the Drawing Room they overpowered the driver of the complainant on gun point and similarly to other inmates of the house and made them to sit in the T.V. Lounge and started searching the house. Meanwhile father of the complainant entered in the house, he was also made to sit in the T.V. Lounge. They made search of the house for one hour and took households in addition to cash of Rs,1, 60,000. All the accused were Punjabi-speaking. They put the articles in their car and ran away. He can identify the accused if brought before him.
3. During investigation one computer was recovered from the petitioner, therefore, he is charged with an offence under section 412, P.P.C. The case is still under investigation and challan has not been submitted. Petitioner was arrested on 11-10-2000.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. He is aged 59 years according to the police record. He had not participated in the occurrence. Mere recovery of computer from him does not constitute an offence under section 412, P.P.C. And at the most he could be charged under section 411, P.P.C. Which does not fall within the prohibitory clause.
5. Learned State Counsel has opposed the giant of bail.
6. Heard. Record perused. Admittedly petitioner is aged 59 years. He has not participated in the occurrence. Only a computer was recovered from him during investigation. Investigating Officer states that petitioner is not involved in any other case. He is an aged man and is behind the bars for the last more than a month. The trial of the case is likely to take considerable long period.
Question whether the offence under section 412, P.P.C. Or 411, P.P.C. Is attracted in the present case shall only be determined after recording evidence by the trial Court. At present suffice it to observe that it is a case of further inquiry qua involvement of the petitioner.
7. For the reasons stated above, petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.