| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLD 3015 |
Islamabad High Court
Criminal Misc. No. 124-B of 2023
Presented By: ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR
23.02.2023 Mr Yasir Aziz, Advocate for petitioner. Mr Muhammad Umar, State Counsel. Mr Khalid Mehmood, SI with record.
Criminal Misc. No. 124-B of 2023
Presented By: ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR
23.02.2023 Mr Yasir Aziz, Advocate for petitioner. Mr Muhammad Umar, State Counsel. Mr Khalid Mehmood, SI with record.
Muhammad Waris
VERSUS
The State & another
Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860
Section: 392, 411
ORDER SHEET Arbab Muhammad Tahir, J.- Through this petition, the petitioner (Muhammad Waris son of Muhammad Yaqoob) has prayed for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R No.56, dated 14-09-2022, under Section 392, 411 PPC, Police Station, Sangjani, Islamabad. Succinctly, the facts are, that the on written complaint of Abdul Rehman the instant criminal case was registered, wherein he alleged that on 13-09-2022, at about 10:10 p.m., when he was accompanying his mother, two unknown persons, riding Honda-125 motorcycle bearing registration No. RIN-2564, snatched mobile phone i.e. I-Phone 11 from the complainant on gunpoint. The petitioner was subsequently arrested in case FIR No.78/2022 registered at Police Station Sangjani and during interrogation he disclosed his involvement in the commission of the offence reported in the instant criminal case. Learned counsel contends that; the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case with malafide intention and ulterior motive; the recovery of snatched mobile phone is planted one; nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; delay in the identification parade makes the case of the petitioner as of further inquiry; the petitioner is not nominated in the FIR; that offence under Sections 392 and 411 PPC do not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C; that petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and that he is not a previous convict and is no more required for further investigation therefore, entitled to the concession of post arrest bail. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the bail petition, inter alia, that the petitioner is involved in the commission of offence; snatched mobile phone was recovered on the pointation of the petitioner; the petitioner has been identified during identification parade by the complainant; the petitioner is connected with the commission of offence; the offence is heinous and against the society; the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. Arguments heard, record perused. Record transpires that during investigation in…