ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Cr. Bail Application No.743 of 2018
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE(S) OF JUDGE(S)
FOR HEARING OF BAIL APPLICATION
Date of hearing: 13.6.2018
Date of Order: 13.6.2018
M/s Hussain Bux & Ghulam Mustafa Katpar, advocate for applicant
Mr. Sagheer Abbasi, APG a/w SI Nadeem Akhtar, CRO/ CIA Branch
ORDER
Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J. Having remained unsuccessful in obtaining his release on bail from the trial Court in Crime No.101/2018 registered under Section 23(i)a of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 at PS SIU/ CIA, Karachi. Now the applicant Roshan Ali Tunio son of Ghulam Muhammad Tunio is seeking his release on bail through instant bail application.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 03.5.2018 at about 0100 hours, applicant/ accused has been apprehended by the Police party and recovered one 30 bore pistol, without number, with 04 live bullets from his possession in presence of Mashirs.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for applicant/ accused that the case against applicant/ accused is false and has been registered due to enmity; that nothing was recovered from the applicant and the applicant has been arrested from his house and the alleged weapon was foisted against him; that the case has been challaned and this applicant/ accused is no more required for investigation and the applicant is behind the bars without any substantial progress in the trial; therefore, he prayed for bail.
4. Learned APG opposed this bail application on the ground that name of the applicant/ accused is appearing in FIR and at the time of his arrest, one 30 bore pistol along with 04 live bullets were recovered from his possession in presence of Mashirs, who have no inimical terms with him, prima-facie shows the involvement of the applicant in this case.
5. I have given my anxious thoughts to the contentions raised at the bar and have gone through the case papers so made available before me.
6. It appears from the record that the case has been challaned and this applicant/ accused is no more required for investigation. The case and claim of the prosecution has been denied by the learned counsel for applicant on the ground that nothing was recovered from the possession of the applicant and the recovery if any in this case has been foisted against the applicant. It appears from the record that the whole case of the prosecution is rest upon the evidence of the Police officials, who are interested witnesses, therefore, their evidence is required to be minutely scrutinized at the time of trial whether the offence as stated in FIR has been committed by the applicant or otherwise. It is argued by learned APG that this applicant is involved in more than one cases, therefore, he is not entitled for bail. Reverting to the contentions as stated by learned APG, it is suffice to say that merely pendency of the criminal cases against any accused does not ipso-facto disentitle any of the accused, if otherwise he is entitled for bail. On Court’s query, learned APG has failed to point out that this applicant has been convicted and sentenced in any of the criminal case.
7. As observed above, challan against the applicant/ accused has been submitted, therefore, under the aforementioned facts and circumstances, I come to the conclusion that applicant/ accused has made out a case for grant of bail. I, accordingly, admit the applicant/ accused on bail after his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
8. Needless to mention here that any observation if made in this order is tentative in nature and shall not effect the merits of the case. It is made clear that in case if during proceedings the applicant/ accused misuses the bail, then trial Court would be competent to cancel the bail of the applicant after due notice to him.
Judge
asim/pa