ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S -225 of 2020.

For Hearing of bail application

05-06-2020.

Mr. Shoaib-ur-Rahman Memon advocate for applicant.

Mr. Mansoor Hussain Maitlo advocate for complainant.

Mr. Abdul Rahman Kolachi DPG for the State

>>>>>…<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J;- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits in furtherance of their common intention not only committed Qatl-e-amd of Abdul Rauf by causing him fire shot injury but also caused butt blows to PW Haibatullah with intention to commit his murder for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge Khairpur, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Crl. Bail Application under section 497 Cr.P.C.

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 only to satisfy its previous grudge with him over cattle trespass; there is conflict of time with regard to death of the deceased between ocular and medical evidence; co-accused Imtiaz, Lakhmeer and Asadullah have already been let off by the police; no fire shot injury was repeated by the applicant and there is great apprehension of the applicant being infected by Corona virus (Covid-19) while being in jail. By contending so he prayed for release of applicant on bail on point of further inquiry.

4. Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have sought for dismissal of the instant bail application by contending that the applicant is fully involved in commission of incident and on arrest from him has been secured crime weapon.

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

6. The applicant is named in FIR, with specific allegation that he has committed death of the deceased by causing fire shot injury only to satisfy his grudge with him on account of cattle trespass. In that situation, it would be premature to say that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party. Apparently there is no conflict with regard to the time of death of the deceased between medical and ocular account of the evidence. If for the sake of arguments, it is believed to be so, even then same could not be resolved by this Court, simply for the reason that the deeper appreciation of the facts and circumstances is not permissible at bail stage. The deceased has died after sustaining single fire shot injury, therefore there was hardly a need for the applicant to have repeated the same. It is true that co-accused Imtiaz, Lakhmeer and Asadullah have been let off by the police, but there could be made no denial to the fact that they have been joined in trial by learned Magistrate/trial Court and they even otherwise were have a different role to that of the applicant. On arrest, from the applicant has also been secured crime weapon, such recovery could not be lost sight of. In these circumstances, it would be hard to admit the applicant to bail only for the reason that he has got apprehension to be infected with corona virus while in jail.

8. In view of facts and reasons discussed above, it could be concluded safely that no case for grant of bail to the applicant is made-out. Consequently, the instant Crl. Bail pplication is dismissed.

Judge

ARBROHI