IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-347 of 2018

Applicant                :                        Gulzar s/o Muhammad Punhal Mugheri,

Through Mr.Ahmed Bux Abro, Advocate

State                          :                       Through Mr.Raja Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G,

                                                            Complainant Zamir Hussain in person

Date of hearing      :                       10.08.2018

Date of order          :                       10.08.2018

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, committed Qatl-e-Amd of Ghulam Qadir by causing him fire short injuries and then went away by making aerial firing, for that the present case was registered.

2.                    On having been refused post-arrest bail by learned trial Court, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 497 Cr.PC.

3.                    It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that he being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party on account of dispute over matrimonial affairs; the specific role of causing fire shot injuries to deceased Ghulam Qadir is attributed to co-accused Ali Asghar and Ali Asghar alias Zamir Hussain. Co-accused Chodiyo and Saghir Hussain have already been admitted to bail by learned trial Court. The role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent of making aerial firing. By contending so, he sought for release of applicant on bail, as his case is calling for further enquiry.

4.                    The learned A.P.G assisted by the complainant has opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that he has remained in absconsion for about 17 years.

5.                    I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

6.                    The specific role of committing death of the deceased Ghulam Qadir by causing him fire shot injuries is attributed to co-accused Ali Asghar and Ali Asghar alias Zamir Hussain. The role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent of making aerial firing. There is delay of one day in recording 161 Cr.PC statements of PWs, such delay could not be lost sight of. Co-accused Ali Asghar has been let off by the police on investigation finding him to be innocent. The parties are already disputed over matrimonial affairs. In that situation, the participation of the applicant in commission of the incident requires further enquiry.

7.                    It is settled by now that the grant of bail was made out on merit could not be withheld on point of absconsion alone. The useful reference in that respect may be placed upon case of Mitho Pitafi & Ors vs. the State (2009 SCMR-299), wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Court that;

“Co-accused was released on bail by the Trial Court, but the concession of bail was declined to accused petitioner on the ground that he was fugitive from law---High Court as well as the Trial Court had rejected the bail of petitioner on account of his absconsion and not on merits---Validity---Bail could be granted, if accused had got good case for bail on merits and mere his absconsion would not come in the way while granting him bail---High Court had not appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case in its true perspective while declining bail to the petitioner”.

8.                    In view of the facts and reasons discussed above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.  

9.                    The instant application is disposed of accordingly.

                                     J U D G E

-