IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-311 of 2018

Applicant               :                         Kamran Ali s/o  Anwar Ali Lashari, Through Mr.Muhammad Ismail Abro, Advocate

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

                                                            Complainant Zulfiqar Ali Lashari in person

Date of hearing      :                       27.08.2018             

Date of order          :                       27.08.2018                         

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention committed death of Zakir Ali by causing him lathi and sotti blows, 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 the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party only to satisfy their matrimonial dispute with him, there is delay of about 20 hours in lodging of the FIR and no specific injury to the deceased even otherwise is attributed to the applicant. By contending so, he sought for release of applicant on bail, as according to him his case is calling for further enquiry. In support of his contention, he relied upon case of Jaffar and others vs. the State (1980 SCMR 784), 2). Rashid Ali vs. the State and another (2013 PLD 843), and 3). Dilmurad vs. the State (2010 SCMR-1178).

4.                     Learned A.P.G assisted by the complainant has opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that he has actively participated in commission of the incident by causing lathi blows to the deceased.  

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 with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention, committed death of deceased Zakir Ali by causing him lathi and sotti blows. In that situation, it would be premature to observe that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party on account of their dispute with him over matrimonial affairs. The dispute between the parties over matrimonial affairs may be there but it may not be a reason for involvement of the applicant in this case falsely at the cost of life of an innocent person. It is true that no specific injury to the deceased is attributed to the applicant but there could be made no denial to the fact that the vicarious liability on his part is very much evident of the record, as he actively participated in commission of the incident by causing unspecified lathi blows to the deceased. No doubt, there is delay of about 20 hours in lodgment of the FIR but it is explained in FIR itself. The delay in lodgment of the FIR even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage in favour of the applicant. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence, for which he is charged.

7.                     The case law which is relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In case of Jaffar and others (supra), the main reason for admitting the accused to bail was that after lodging of the FIR, the complainant gave a counter version of the incident. In the instant case, there is no counter version of the incident. In case of Rashid Ali (supra), the main reason for admitting the accused to bail was that on successive investigation the police came to the conclusion that the accused at the time of incident was simply found available at the place of incident with no weapon. In the present case, the applicant has been attributed the role of causing lathi blows to the deceased. In case of Dilmurad (supra), the main reason for admitting the accused to bail was that his name was placed in column No.2 of challan sheet by the police finding him to be innocent. In the instant case, the accused has not been found to be innocent by the police.

8.                    In view of facts and reasons discussed above, it could be concluded safely that no case for grant of bail to the applicant is made out. Consequently, the instant application is dismissed.

                             J U D G E

-