IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No.304 of 2019

Applicant              :         Syed  Babar Shah son of Syed Zahir Shah,

through Mr. Abdul Haleem Jamali,  Advocate.

Respondent          :         The State through Ms. Rubina Qadir,

Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh

Date of hearing     :         26.04.2019

Date of decision    :         26.04.2019

O R D E R

Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J.  Through this bail application, the applicant/accused seeks bail in Crime No.655 of 2013, registered at police station CID Sindh Karachi, under Section 23(1)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2013. Prior to filing this bail application, applicant/accused was approached to trial Court for seeking bail, which was rejected vide order dated 06.02.2019.

2.       The allegations against the applicant/accused is that on the relevant date and time, one unlicensed 30 bore pistol without number, loaded magazine along with four live rounds, was recovered from his possession in presence of police mashirs.

3.       It is argued by learned Counsel for the applicant that the case against the applicant/accused is false and has been falsely booked by the complainant; that the alleged recovery has been foisted upon the applicant/accused by police with malafide intention; that the case has been challaned and the applicant/accused is no more required for investigation; that the applicant/accused has no past criminal history and it is yet to be determined at the time of trial whether the applicant/accused has committed the alleged offence as narrated in the FIR in a fashion or otherwise, till then, the case of the applicant/accused requires further probe; that applicant/accused was granted bail by the trial Court and on furnishing surety, he was released, but due to unawareness about the date of hearing, he could not attend the trial Court and in consequences, bailable warrants were issued against him, thereafter, applicant/accused was re-arrested in some other case and approached to the trial Court by filing second bail application for seeking bail in instant crime, but the same was rejected through order dated 06.02.2019.

4.       In contra, learned Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh has raised no objections.

5.       I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the case papers so made available before me.

6.       It is an admitted position that case has been challaned and the applicant/accused is no more required for investigation. The whole case of the prosecution is rest upon the evidence of police officials. No doubt that the evidence of police officials are as good as other witnesses, but since the whole case of prosecution rest upon the police officials, therefore, their evidence is required to be minutely scrutinized at the time of trial. As observed above, this applicant/accused has previously granted bail by the trial Court, but due to unawareness of the date of hearing, his bail was recalled. No past criminal history is placed on record. Under the circumstances, the applicant/accused is granted bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.5000/- [Rupees Five Thousand only] and PR Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

7.       Needless to mention here that observations, if any, made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits. However, the applicant/accused is directed to be careful in future and remained vigilant and attend the Court on each and every date of hearing. It is made clear that in case applicant/accused during proceedings before the trial Court misuses the concession of bail, then the trial Court would be competent to cancel the bail of applicant/accused without making any reference to this Court.

JUDGE

Faizan/PA*