IN THE HIGH
COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No. 359 of 2018
Haji Ishaq
..
...
..Applicant
Versus
The
State
.
..
.Respondent
Date
of Hearing & Short Order : 11.09.2018
Mr.
Abdul Shakoor Abbasi, advocate
for applicant
Mr.
Qadir Bux Jarwar, advocate for complainant
Mr.
Tali Ali Memon, APG for
State
O R D E R
Fahim
Ahmed Siddiqui, J:
The
applicant Haji Ishaq is present on ad-interim
pre-arrest bail granted to him vide Order dated 08-03-2018 in a case registered
at PS Makli, District Thatta
vide FIR No. 138/2017 u/s 302, 337-A(i), 147, 148, 149, 114 and 504 PPC. The
said FIR was lodged by complainant Rahim Bux Gandro, in which the applicants anticipatory bail was
declined by Additional Sessions Judge-I, Thatta
through Order dated 23-02-2018, as such applicant
approached this Court. Nevertheless, after initial hearing he succeeded in
getting ad-interim relief which was granted to him without touching merits through
above referred order and now the instant bail application is fixed before me
for final disposal.
2.
I
have heard the arguments advanced from either side and perused record produced
before me. After getting enlightened from the valued submissions made at bar
and scanning the record, I have observed as under:
(a)
The
allegations against the applicant are that the applicant has instigated the
co-accused Yousuf, who caused fatal blow to the
deceased Salim (brother of complainant) with a hammer due to which he fallen
down. The other accused also caused injury to the deceased through the
respective tools used by them in a stone quarry.
(b)
The
only allegation against the applicant is that he instigated the co-accused for
causing murder of the deceased.
(c)
The
motives for the incident is that the complainant and accused party are
interested to work in a stone quarry for collecting and selling stones and
ballast made from the stones. It appears that the complaining party was
insisting upon to work at the same place, which triggered the happening of
incident.
(d)
Within
the body of FIR, no overt act has been assigned to the applicant saved to
investigation, which in the peculiar circumstances of the case seems hardly
possible.
(e)
In
the instant case, co-accused, who is the principal accused of the incident, has
been arrested while the role assigned to the applicant is meagre in nature.
(f)
The
applicant has taken a defence plea regarding his non-availability on the said date/time
at the place of incident.
(g)
In
the peculiar circumstances of the case when there is only allegation of
instigation, the present case is a fit case for further probe. The applicant is
said to be a male member of family, for whom it is claimed that he is an old
man. The applicant, who is present in Court and by his physique and appearance,
it is verifiable that he is an old man.
(h)
Being
the elder of his family and on account of aforementioned enmity, it can be said
that the case of anticipatory bail is likely to be extended to the applicant
because false involvement cannot be ruled out.
3.
In view of the above discussion, it is my considered opinion
that a case of bail has been made out as such the earlier order of granting ad-interim
relief of pre-arrest
bail is hereby confirmed on the same terms and condition.
4.
It is pertinent to mention here that the applicant has
to appear before the trial Court. If he fails to do so, the trial court will be
competent to take every action against the applicant including cancellation of
bail to the applicant and appropriate action against his surety.
5.
These are the reasons for short order passed on
11.09.2018.
J U D G E