ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,
BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Bail. Appln. No. S – 779 of 2018
Date Order
with Signature of Hon’ble Judge
For hearing
of bail application
04.3.2019
Mr. Ali Ahmed Khan Advocate
for the Applicants
Mr. Abdul Rehman
Kolachi, DPG for the State
>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<
Irshad Ali Shah, J;- It is
alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits after having formed an
unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object not only fired and
injured PW Imdad Ali with intention to commit his
murder but committed murder of Farhan Ali by causing
him fire shot injuries, for that the present case was registered.
2. On having been refused post-arrest
bail by learned IV-Additional Sessions Judge Mirpur Mathelo, the applicants now have sought for the same from
this Court by way of instant application u/s 497 Cr.P.C.
3. It is contended by learned counsel
for the applicants that; the applicants being innocent have been involved in
this case falsely by the complainant party; there is delay of about one day in
lodgment of FIR, co‑accused have already been admitted to bail,
complainant Dhani Bux, PW Imdad Ali
and PW Qaiser by filing their
affidavits have already recorded no objection to grant of bail to the
applicants. By contending so, he sought for grant of bail to the applicants on
point of further inquiry.
4. Learned DPG for the State has
recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicants.
5. I have considered the above
arguments and perused the record.
6. There is delay of about one day in
lodgment of FIR; same as such could not be lost sight of. There is general
allegation of the incident and more so complainant Dhani
Bux, PWs Imdad Ali and Qaisar by filing
their affidavits before learned trial Court have already recorded no objection
to grant of bail to the applicants by stating therein that they in private faisla have been found to be innocent, learned trial Court
as such ought not to have refused bail to the applicants under the pretext that
complainant party has taken summersault. In these circumstances, the applicants
are found entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry.
7. In
case of Muhammad Najeeb vs. State (2009 SCMR-448), it
has been held by Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that;
“complainant
initially had nominated the accused in the FIR but later-on through an
affidavit he has expressed his satisfaction with regard to innocence of the
accused, the case of the accused was of further enquiry”.
8. In
view of above, the applicants are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing
surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- (Two lac) each and
PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
Judge
ARBROHI