ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail. Appln. No. S – 707 of 2018

Date Order with Signature of Hon’ble Judge

For hearing of bail application

1. For orders on office objection at flag ‘A’

2. For hearing of bail application

(Notice issued)

05.4.2019

Mr. Mushtaque Ahmed Solangi Advocate for the Applicant

Mr. Sundar Khan Chachar Advocate for the complainant

Syed Sardar Ali Shah, DPG 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 caused fire shot injuries to PW Abdul Ghaffar at his flank with intention to commit his murder for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ubauro, 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 in order to satisfy their enmity with him over matrimonial affairs, there is delay of nine days in lodgment of FIR and co-accused Abdul Jabbar and Ali Gul have already been admitted to bail by learned trial Court. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicant on point of malafide.

4. Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he has actively participated in the commission of incident by causing fire shot injury to PW Abdul Ghaffar.

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

6. The name of the applicant is appearing in the FIR with specific allegation that he caused fire shot injury to PW Abdul Ghaffar at his flank with intention to commit his murder, in order to satisfy his matrimonial dispute with him. In that situation, it would be premature to say that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party. The matrimonial dispute between the parties may be there, but it may not be reason for false involvement of the applicant in this case. It is true that there is delay of about nine days in lodgment of FIR, but there could be made no denial to the fact that it is explained in the FIR itself plausibly. The delay in lodgment of FIR even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. It is true that co-accused Abdul Jabbar and Ali Gul have already been admitted to bail by learned trial Court, but there could be made no denial to the fact that their case is distinguishable to that of the applicant. No malafide is apparent of the record, which may justify admitting the applicant to pre‑arrest bail. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence for which he is charged. Consequently, the instant Criminal Bail Application for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant is dismissed.

7. The order whereby the applicant was admitted to interim pre-arrest bail is recalled and vacated.

Judge

ARBROHI