ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr.B.A.No.S-13 of 2020

DATE                          ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of bail application.

02.04.2020.

Mr. Habibullah Ghouri, advocate for applicant.

Mr. Irfan Badar Abbasi, Advocate for complainant.

                        Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G for the State.

                                              -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Irshad Ali Shah J;-  It is alleged that applicant Nadir with rest of the culprits being armed with deadly weapons, robbed complainant Khalid Hussain of his money worth Rs.13,92,500/- by causing him butt blows,   for that the present case outcome of FIR Crime No.105/2019, offence u/s.395,337-F(i),148,149 PPC was registered with P.S Saddar, Qamber.                                                                                                       

2.                    The applicant on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Qamber-Shahdadkot @ Qamber, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s 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; the FIR has been lodged with unexplained delay of about 19 days and there is no recovery of any sort from the applicant, as such according to him the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry. In support of his contentions he relied upon cases of Muhammad Yaseen and another vs.The State (1995 PCr.LJ-711) and Moula Bux and another vs.The State(2003 PCr.LJ-394).

4.                 Learned D.P.G. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that the offence which the applicant has allegedly committed is affecting the society at large. In support of their contentions, they relied upon case of Mehboob-ul-Hassan vs.The State (1995 SCMR-1013).

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

6.                 The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about 19 days, such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. Indeed, it is reflecting deliberation and consultation. The recovery of robbed property to some extent and crime weapon, if any, is made from co-accused Muzafar Ali. There is no medical certificate with regard to injuries allegedly sustained by the complainant during course of incident. In these circumstances, the applicant is found entitled to be released on bail pending trial,   as his case is calling for further inquiry.

7.                The case law which is relied upon by learned D.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In that case, there was recovery of robbed property from the accused. In the instant case, there is no recovery of any sort from the applicant.

8.                 In view of the above, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a solvent surety in sum of Rs.100,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

9.                The instant bail application is disposed of in above terms.

 J U D G E