' Muhammad Tahir, the petitioner through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,72 dated 14-11-2002 under section 394/34, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station Railway Sama Satta, District Bahawalpur.
2. Briefly the facts of the prosecution case as contained in the F.I.R. Are that on 13-11-2002 three persons, the description of whom had been given therein, while armed with lethal weapons had committed dacoity. During the course of the same,, they on fire-arm point had taken away Rs,30,00,000 (Rupees thirty lacs) from Digy of the car driven by the complainant and they had also fired at him.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been roped in; that there is one day's delay in lodging the F.I.R.; that he is not named in the F.I.R.; that he was not put to any identification test in accordance with law; that there is no incriminating material on record against him; that recovery of some amount has been planted upon him and the same is absolutely fictitious while in fact no recovery was effected from him; that he is behind the bars for the last about seven months; and that he is previous non-convict.
4. Conversely, the learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the petition on the ground that he alongwith his co-accused had committed the dacoity during the course of which they on fire-arms point had taken away Rs,30,00,000 (Rupees thirty lacs) from the Digy of the car driven by the complainant and on his resistance they had also fired at him; that on the basis of statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Of P.Ws. Allah Wasaya, Riaz Ahmad and Muhammad Bakhsh, he (petitioner) is connected with the crime; that he was identified by the complainant in the police custody; and that the offence is heinous in nature.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with the help of available record.
6. The fact remains that he is not named in the F.I.R. Admittedly, he was not put to any identification test under the supervision of the Magistrate. The amount of Rs,11,000 only had shown to have been effected from him. It is his plea that this recovery has been planted upon him and the same was not effected from him. Anyway, the alleged recovery of the said amount is in the shape of currency notes. These are of common pattern.
7. The statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Recorded on 21-2-2003 of Malik Allah Wasaya, Riaz Ahmad and Muhammad Baldish P.Ws. Are to the effect that his brother had made confession before Faiz Rasool and Azra, Naib Nazim, Bahawalpur. He allegedly was also identified by the complainant in the police custody. The question that what value these statements of the aforementioned P.Ws. And his identification in the police custody carry in the eyes of law needs consideration.
8. Besides than this, the above factors that he is not named in the F.I.R. And was not put to any identification test under the supervision of the Magistrate as required under the law and the alleged recovery is in the shape of currency notes of common pattern renders his case as one of further inquiry into his guilt. The same, therefore, is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
9. He is stated to be behind the bars for the last about seven months and previous non-convict.
10. In these circumstances, I find him entitled to bail. The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lacs) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Ilaqa/Duty Magistrate.