ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR
Crl. Bail. Application
No.S- 16 of 2020
For hearing
of bail application
01.06.2020
Mr. Ghulam Shabbir Dayo
Advocate for applicants 1 & 3
Mr. Aftab Hussain Shar, Advocate for
applicants 2 & 4
Mr. Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro Advocate
for the complainant
Mr.
Abdul Rehman Kolachi, DPG for the State
>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<
Irshad Ali Shah, J;-. It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the
culprits after having formed an unlawfully assembly being armed with deadly
weapons and in prosecution of their common object committed Qatl-e-Amd of Abdul
Sattar by causing him fire shot injuries and then went away by making aerial
firing to create harassment, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by
learned 4thAdditional Sessions Judge Khairpur, have sought for the
same from this Court by way of instant bail application under Section 498-A
Cr.P.C.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that
applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the
complainant party in order to satisfy their matrimonial dispute with them; the
FIR has been lodged with delay of about two days; the applicants on
investigation have been found to be innocent and their names have been placed
in column No.2 of the charge sheet by the police, therefore, they are entitled
to grant of pre-arrest bail on the point of malafide. In support of their
contention, they have relied upon case of Ali Akber vs. The State (SBLR 2011 Sindh 1).
4. Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the
complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants by
contending that they have actively participated in commission of incident. In
support of their contention, they have relied upon case of Muhammad Yusuf vs. The State
(1986 SCMR 182).
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about
two days, such delay having not being explained plausibly could not be
overlooked. The active role of committing death of the deceased by causing him
fire shot injuries is attributed to co-accused Muhammad Ayoub, Ali Dino alias
Zawar, Abdul Rehman and Ismail. The role attributed to the applicants in
commission of incident is only to the extent of their presence and / or making
fires in air, which appears to be significant. The applicants on investigation have
been found to be innocent and their names have been placed in column No.2 of
the charge sheet by the police. Parties are already disputed over matrimonial
affairs, therefore, the possibility of the false involvement of the applicants
could not be ruled out.
7. Case of Muhammad Yusuf (supra) which is
relied upon by learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the
complainant is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In that case leave
to appeal was refused by Hon’ble Supreme Court with an observation that the
sentence / conviction awarded to the accused is not excessive. In the instant
matter none is convicted what to talk of leave to appeal on point of excessive
sentence/conviction.
8. In view of
above, the instant bail application is accepted, consequently interim
pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants is confirmed on same terms
and conditions.
9. Needless to
say that the observations made above are tentative in nature and may not affect
the case of either of the party at trial.
Judge
ARBROHI