ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Bail Application No.S-198 of 2018.

Date	Order with signature of Judge

Present

Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito.

Applicants: 1. Attaullah s/o Dad Muhammad Shaikh.

2. Allah Ditto s/o Ghulam Hyder.

3. Hazoor Bux s/o Noor Muhammad.

4. Wahid Bux s/o Allah Bachayo.

5. Muhammad Akram @ Akram s/o Umar Bux through Mr. Amanullah Shar advocate.

Respondent. The State.

Mr. Mir Afazal Hussain Talpur, Assistant Prosecutor General.

Date of hearing. 13-08-2018.

O R D E R.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.-The captioned bail application is directed against the order dated 29-03-2018, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Ubauro, whereby the pre arrest bail application of the applicants/accused was dismissed.

2. Briefly, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 21-03-2017 complainant SarfrazShaikh has lodged the F.I.R. alleging therein that on 17-09-2017 he has contracted love marriage with Mst. Asia, on which Attaullah and others were annoyed. About two months ago accused Wadero Muhammad AyubShaikh called the complainant party at the Otaq of accused Allah Ditto Shaikh, hence, complainant along with his grandfather namely Imam Bux and relatives Wazeer Ahmed went there, where accused WaeroAyubShaikh, Attaullah, Allah Ditto, Hazoor Bux, Wahid Bux, Akram, Rahim and 8/10 other unidentified persons were sitting. After talks, at about 1700 hours, WaderoAyub pronounced Faisla and imposed fine of Rs. 10,00,000/- on complainant. Complainant party requested the accused persons that they are poor persons and cannot pay the fine amount, but amount days prior to lodging the F.I.R., accused Attaullah and Allah Ditto came at the house of complainant and disclosed that they will give the house of complainant in lieu of Rs.600,000/- and hand of Mst. Rubina in the sum of Rs. 400,000/-. Then complainant requested to his sister Mst. Rubina, but she did not accept such request and being disappointed, she poisons something in the food and used herself and also serve the same to her mother Rukhsana and father Shahnawaz. Resultantly Mst. Rubina died at the spot, while her mother and father are admitted in the Hospital and they are under treatment. Ultimately complainant appeared at police station and lodged the above said F.I.R.

3. It is, inter-alia, contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case; that there is inordinate delay of about two months in lodging the F.I.R. and such delay has not been explained by the complainant; that prior to this, applicant/accused Wahid Bux has lodged F.I.R. bearing Crime No. 03/2018, offence u/s 324, 365, 511 P.P.C at police station Ubauro against the complainant party and instant F.I.R. has been lodged as counter blast; that co-accused Wadero Muhammad Ayub has been released u/s 497 CrPC by the police and case of applicants/accused is identical to that of co-accused.

4. On the other, learned APG states that co-accused Wadero Muhammad AyubShaikh being influential person has been released by the police; that due to love marriage of complainant with Mst. Asia, his entire family has been ruined and his sister preferred to die by committing suicide.

5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on the record. From a perusal of the record, it appears that it is suicide case. Record further reflects that neither applicants/accused were present at the place of incident nor they compelled deceased Mst. Asia to marry in lieu of marriage of complainant, which shows that there is no direct evidence against the applicants. Moreover, there is inordinate delay of about two months in lodging the F.I.R, although the police station was situated at the distance of only 3/4 kilometers, inspite of that complainant has not lodged the F.I.R. promptly, which shows malafide on the part of complainant to falsely implicate the applicants/accused. Co-accused Wadero Muhammad Ayub has been released by the police and case of the applicants/accused stands on same footing.

6. In view of the above, interim pre arrest bail, already granted to the applicants/accused is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

Judge

Nasim/P.A