IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

      

 

                            Crl. Bail Appln No.821  of  2011

   Date                         Order with signature of Judge

 

1.For orders on MA No.700/2011

2.For orders on Office objection

3.For orders on MA No.701/2011

4.For hearing.

 

18.07.2011

 

Mr.Saddat Hassan,  Advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.

                                      -----

 

1.       Granted.

2.       Deferred

3.       Granted subject to all just exceptions.

 

4.       This bail application has been moved in FIR No.36/2011, U/S6,7,8,9-(C ) 12,13,14,15 CNS Act, P.S. ANF Clifton, Karachi.

Brief facts of the case are that  S.I. Mohammad Afzal  has lodged FIR on 23.5.2011 in which it was inter alia stated that 11 cartons were found suspect which were opened and checked, 1000 match box of cartons 50/50 match boxes in every rods and 20/20 rods in each cartons were recovered while 836 match boxes were recovered from the 11th carton, every match box was checked opened whereupon heroin wrapped in white plastic bags from each match box was recovered. It is contended by the learned counsel that in the FIR one JS Bank's card in the name of    Zeeshan Ahmed has been   recovered   from   co-accused   Kamran  and  except this no role or allegation  against the    present applicant  has been made in the FIR and on the    basis    of     recovery     of     Bank's     Card      the  name of the applicant     has      been    included    in the   charge sheet       for     trial.      Learned      counsel      further

contended that present applicant was the employee of co-accused Kamran but he left the job 16 months ago, while the incident took place on 23.5.2011. To a query as to how the ATM card of applicant was found in the custody of co-accused Kamran, learned counsel replied that the entire Bank documents were fabricated and ATM card managed by the co-accused Kamran and the name of the applicant was used, while the applicant was never applied for ATM Card and being employee he brought the applicant to the Bank and got his account opened but the account was being operated by Kamran and cheque book was also in his custody. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery was made from the present applicant and he has been only implicated on the basis of recovery of ATM Card,  therefore, it is a matter of further inquiry against him.

          Issue notice to the Special Prosecutor ANF. Meanwhile, without touching to the merits of the case, applicant is granted pre-arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this court.

          To come up on  21.7.2011 for confirmation or otherwise.

 

JUDGE

nasir

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

      

                            Crl.Bail Appln NO.823  OF  2011

   Date                         Order with signature of Judge

1.For orders on MA No.7053/2011

2.For orders on Office objection

3.For orders on MA No.7054/2011

4.For hearing.

 

18.07.2011

 

Mr.Liaquat Ali,  Advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.

Mr.Mohammad Iqbal Awan, APG

                                      -----

1.       Granted.

2.       Office objection is over-ruled.

3.       Granted subject to all just exceptions.

 

4.       This bail application has been moved in FIR No.14/2011 U/S 397, 34 PPC P.S. Ibrahim Haidri.

Brief facts of the case are that complainant Ejaz Khan  lodged the complaint against three unknown persons, who allegedly carrying TT pistols  and one of them  hit the complainant with butt of TT pistol  and opened cash drawer and looted cash Rs.30,000/-. Learned counsel contended that though the name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR however, the police has place his name as absconder in Column No.2 of Charge-sheet under section 173 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has also given copy of Charge-Sheet which taken on record.

Learned counsel apprehends that if protective bail is not allowed to the applicant the applicant will be apprehended by the police as his father is already under custody. Learned counsel further contends that the applicant tried to approach the trial court for bail but the trial court is surrounded by the police therefore, protective bail may be granted to the applicant. The AGP waives notice and he has no objection for the grant of protective bail to the applicant.

Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances and without touching the merits of the case, the applicant is granted protective bail for 10 days subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this court. The applicant will surrender himself before the trial court and move bail application.

This protective bail order will remain valid for 10 days only thereafter, it will be automatically ceased to have any effect.

 

JUDGE

nasir