ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr.B.A.No.S-204 of 2020

DATE                          ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of bail application.

04.05.2020.

Mr. Peerano Khan Jatoi, Advocate for the applicants.

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

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

Irshad Ali Shah J;- It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, by making trespass into house of complainant Ghulam Muhammad caused him and PW Danish kicks, fists and iron rod blows and then went away by threatening them to be killed by pointing their weapons at them, for that present case was registered.

2.                    The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 6^th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s.498 Cr.PC.

3.                    It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party in order to satisfy their dispute with them over kids’ fight; the FIR has lodged with delay of about five days and the offence alleged against the applicants is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. By contending so, he prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants on point of further inquiry and malafide.

4.                    Learned D.P.G for the State has recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicants. 

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

6.                    The FIR of the incident has been lodged with unplausible delay of about five days and such delay could not be overlooked; the offence alleged is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC; the parties are already disputed over issue of kids’ fight, which constitutes an act of malafide on part of complainant party. In these circumstances, the applicants are found entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of malafide and further inquiry.

7.                    In case of Khalil Ahmed Soomro and others Vs. The State (PLD 2017 SC-730), the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that;

“----Ss. 498 & 497---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-F(vi), 337-L(2) & 504---Shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah damiyah, ghayr-jaifah munaqqillah, other hurt, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace---Pre-arrest bail, grant of---Mala fide of complainant---Offences with which accused persons were charged were punishable by way of imprisonment which did not fall within the prohibitory part of S. 497, Cr.P.C.---When the accused persons were entitled to post arrest bail, their prayer for  pre-arrest bail, if  declined, would  be  a  matter  of  technicality alone---Accused persons were likely to be humiliated and disgraced due to their arrest at the hands of the local police---In the present case, it appeared that net had been thrown wider and the injuries sustained by the victims except one or two, had been exaggerated---Seemingly efforts had been made to show that the offences  fell  within  such  provisions  of  law,  which  were punishable with five years' or seven years' imprisonment---All said aspects, when considered combindly, constituted mala fides on part of complainant party---Accused persons were granted pre-arrest bail accordingly”.

8.                    In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to applicants is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

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

J U D G E