IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 22 of 2018

Furqan Qadri…………………..…………………...…………………..Applicant

Versus

The State……………………………….…………..……………….Respondent

Date of Hearing & Short Order : 06.09.2018

Mr. Abdul Salam Lari, advocate for applicant

Mr. Zahoor Shah, DPG

O R D E R

Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui, J: This order will dispose of bail application filed by applicant Furqan Qadri, who is facing trial before the Additional Sessions Judge-V, Karachi (Central) in a criminal case registered against him through FIR No. 245/2013 at PS Khwaja Ajmer Nagri under Sections 302, 34 PPC.

2. I have heard the arguments advanced and have gone through the relevant record as well as cited case laws from either side. From whatever heard and perused, I have observed as under:

i) The allegations in the FIR that the complainant has received information on phone that his brother Azhar received firearm injuries by the hands of three unknown culprits, while he was g oing home on his motorcycle. He rushed to hospital, where he found his brother dead. According to complainant, prior to his death, his deceased brother disclosed that he had some dispute with Arshad, Sajjani & Furqan belonging to Sunni Tahrik and have received threats by them on phone. The complainant has shown his suspect against them.

ii) During investigation, the police have recorded statements of people of locality and also visited the place of the incident. However, no clue was traced out about the accused persons, as such final report was submitted under Section 512 CrPC.

iii) It was subsequently came on the record that the nominated accused were arrested in another case (FIR No. 203/2014 u/s 302 PPC), as such the case was opened against the applicant and production order was issued and he was charged in this case.

iv) The police also visited the place of incident during investigation but nothing material was collected from the place of incident which indicates towards the happening of incident as described by the complainant.

v) Reportedly, the alleged eye-witness of the case has been shifted to some unknown place, as such his attendance cannot be procured in near future. Besides, in the existing circumstance, the attendance of eyewitness Rafique appears to be impossible.

vi) In absence of ocular testimony, there, remains the evidence of complainant, who is real brother of the deceased as such there is no likelihood of tempering of evidence.

vii) Co-accused Arshad is succeeded in getting bail from trial court and in absence of testimony of eyewitness the case of the applicant is somewhat similar to the co-accused succeeded in getting bail.

viii) There is inordinate delay in trial is observable for which the applicant is not responsible.

3. In the backdrop of the above observation, I am of the considered view that a case of bail has been made out for the applicant, as such she was admitted to bail subject to furnishing surety of Rs. 100,000/- up to the entire satisfaction of the trial Court through a short order dated 06-09-2018.

4. Before parting, I would like to further observe that if the applicants after getting bail will not appear before the trial Court and the trial Court is satisfied that the applicants become absconders then the trial Court is fully authorised to take every action against the applicants and their surety including cancellation of bail without making a reference to this Court.

5. The above are the reasons for my short order pronounced on 06-09-2018.

J U D G E