ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,
BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Bail. Appln.
No. S – 589 of 2018
Date Order
with Signature of Hon’ble Judge
For hearing
of bail application
01.04.2019
Mr. J K Jarwar
Advocate a/w applicant
Muhammad Saleem @ Dumbo
Mr.
Bashir Ahmed Shar Advocate
for the complainant
Mr.
Aftab Ahmed Shar,
Additional PG for the State
>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<
Irshad Ali Shah, J; It is alleged that the present applicant with rest of
the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of
their common object not only committed Qatl-e-amd of Muhammad Umar by causing
him dagger and fire shot injuries but caused fire shot and dagger injuries to
PWs Muhammad Ismail and Muhammad Zakria with
intention to commit their murder and then went away by making aerial firing,
for that the present case was registered.
2. The
applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 4th Additional
Sessions Judge, Khairpur, has sought for the same
from this Court by way of instant bail application u/s 498-A Cr.P.C.
3. It is contended by learned
counsel for the applicant that applicant being innocent has been involved in
this case falsely by the complainant party, no effective role in commission of
incident has been attributed to him and he on investigation has also been found
to be innocent by the police. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail
for the applicant as he, according to him is apprehending unjustified arrest at
the hands of police.
4. Learned Additional PG for
the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of
pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he is vicariously liable
for the commission of incident.
5. I have considered the above
arguments and perused the record.
6. Admittedly the role
attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent
of making aerial firing. Whether he actually participated in commission of
incident with vicarious liability? It calls for determination at trial. The
applicant on investigation has also been found to be innocent by the police. In
that situation, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the
applicant that he is entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail, as he is
apprehending his unjustified arrest.
7. In view of above, interim
pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and
conditions.
8. Instant
Cr. Bail Application is disposed of in above terms.
Judge
ARBROHI