1. Applicant Gul Khan seeks bail in Crime No,120 of 2003 for an offence punishable under section 382, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Preedy. The bail application on behalf of the applicant/accused was filed in the trial Court but same was dismissed by an order dated 29-10-1993 passed by the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi-South. The applicant has prayed for grant of bail before this Court on similar grounds. Brief facts as enumerated in the F.I.R. Are that on 20-9-2003 complainant Muhammad Iqbal appeared at Police Station Preedy and verbally reported that he runs business in Shop No,244 (Kiryana Store) situated at Empress Market. On 19-9-2003 at 10 0' Clock night he was present in his shop alongwith his nephew Zohaib and servants, namely, Khalil and Yasir. It is further disclosed that Gul Khan (applicant) having PLAU shop inside Empress Market came and asked for different articles i,e, shampoo, toothpaste, etc. And after taking those articles he managed to go without payment. In spite of demand for payment was raised by his nephew Zohaib but Gul Khan abused him. It is further disclosed in the F.I.R. That the articles taken away by the applicant were worth Rs,5,000 and payment of the said amount was to be made. Whereupon Gul Khan abused them and forcibly took out cash of Rs,35,000 from the pocket of complainant. On his resistance and hue and cry Yaseen and Arif being neighbours came there. Khalid, Yasir and complainant disclosed the facts to the neigbours but applicant Gul Khan took out firearm and threatened the complainant party regarding the demand of articles as well as of Rs,35,000. Due to fear the complainant remained, silent and Gul Khan ran away alongwith cash and grocery articles. The F.I.R. Of the complainant was registered under section 382, P.P.C. And after due investigation the charge-sheet has been filed in the Court of Law having jurisdiction.
2. Mr. Shahadat Awan, learned counsel for the applicant, has contended that there is a dispute between the parties over money matter pertaining to a B.C. Amount of Rs,1,00,000 which was being collected by the complainant and upon his failure to hand over the said amount to its members, one of the participants made report to the police. The said report was made by Ghulam Safdar against Muhammad Iqbal at Police Station Preedy on 20-9-2003. It is further urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that complainant purposely from avoiding to pay due amount to the B.C.
3. Members falsely implicated the accused in this case. It is further argued by the learned counsel that there, are two versions and the prosecution case as during the investigation P. Ws. Khalil Khan, Munawar Hussain Qureshi alias Moona, Raja Abdul Waheed and Ghulam Safdar have stated in 161, Cr.P.C. Statements that there is dispute over B.C. Amount against the complainant and the applicant/accused and applicant Gul Khan is quite innocent and has not snatched any amount from the complainant on 19-9-2003. The said witnesses have also filed affidavits in the Court of 10th Judicial Magistrate, Karachi-South, and Ghulam Safdar has filed a Civil Suit No,1999 of 2003 against Muhammad Iqbal which is pending/ in the Court of Hnd Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Karachi-South, for recovery of Rs,90,000. It is also pointed out that the grocery articles and Rs,35,000 were not recovered from the applicant/accused during the investigation. The prosecution witnesses are interested aid false story has been set-up in the F.I.R. As there is dispute over money matter pertaining to a B.C. For the amount of Rs,1,20,000. The applicant is in custody since 30-9-2003 and it is yet to be decided by the trial Court regarding the allegations alleged by the complainant against the applicant/accused. Conversely, Ms. Akhtar Rehana, learned State Counsel, has vehemently opposed to the grant of this application and submits that complainant and P.Ws. Muhammad Zohaib, Arif, Muhammad Yaseen, Allah Ditta and Khalid Ahmad have implicated the applicant/accused for committing robbery of cash amount of Rs,35,000 and grocery articles. Mr. M.Shafi Khan, learned counsel for the complainant, has adopted the arguments of learned State Counsel and submits that applicant/accused is not entitled for concession of bail. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the respective parties.
4. Admittedly, Khalid Khan, Munawar Hussain Qureshi, Raja Abdul Waheed and Ghulam Safdar were examined during the course of investigation and they are running their business in the Empress Market and they are known to the parties. They are participants of the B.C. And they have made a categorical statement in their affidavits that applicant Gul Khan is innocent and has not snatched any amount from the complainant on 19-9-2003. Ms. Akhtar Rehana, learned State Counsel, has affirmed that during the course of investigation the above named witnesses have not supported the version and no incident of snatching any amount from the complainant was made by the accused Gul Khan Mr. M. Shafi Khan, learned counsel for the complainant, has frankly stated that A.S.-I. Ishfaq Ahmad and S.-I. Chaudhry Waris Ali have spoiled the prosecution case by not effecting the recovery of Rs,35,000 and grocery articles and recorded the statements of P.Ws. Khalil Khan, Munawar Hussain, Waheed and Ghulam Safdar deliberately to extend favour to the applicant/accused. There are six witnesses but P.Ws. Khalil and Yasir are servants whereas Zohaib is nephew of the complainant. As per prosecution case there are two versions and it is yet to be determined by the trial Court that which version is correct one. For the foregoing reasons I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail.
5. Resultantly, bail is granted to the applicant/accused subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two hundred thousand) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The application stands disposed of.