ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No. S-341 of 2020

Applicant : Abdul Hameed Seelro

Through Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Advocate

Respondent : The State

Through Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, APG

Date of hearing : 20.07.2020

Date of Order : 20.07.2020

*****

O R D E R

ADNAN-UL-KARIM MEMON, J: The applicant is seeking post-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.211/2018, for offences punishable under Section 302, 114, 148, 149 PPC, registered at P.S. Ubauro. His earlier bail application was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Ubauro, vide order dated 14.04.2020. He, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the refusal of bail order, has approached this court.

2. The precise allegations against the applicant are that he confessed his guilt before the witnesses, therefore, he was booked in the aforesaid crime. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide order dated 14.05.2019, recorded the aforesaid factual position of the case and granted post-arrest bail to the applicant, however, subsequently, his bail was recalled vide order dated 14.04.2020, with certain reasoning.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant has mainly contended that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case at the behest of Complainant, who is involved in heinous crimes and now confined in Central Prison, Sukkur; that there is delay of two days in registration of FIR but no any plausible reason or cause has been explained; that neither the name of the applicant transpires in the FIR nor in the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C; that the applicant was implicated subsequently on the confession of co-accused Atta Muhammad @ Atto; that the applicant has remained in custody for more than three months; that no any recovery has been made from the applicant; that the case of the present applicant does not attract offence under section 302 P.P.C, which requires further inquiry into his guilt.

4. Learned Assistant Prosecutor General, Sindh has conceded the factual aspect of the case on the premise that on merit he was allowed bail by the learned trial Court, as discussed supra, however, he misused the concession of bail, therefore, his bail was recalled vide order dated 14.04.2020. I queried from him to explain as to whether he has any role in the alleged incident or otherwise he fairly opined that the applicant’s case requires further inquiry.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the Applicant and learned Assistant Prosecutor General as well and have minutely perused the material available on record.

6. I have noticed that the learned trial court examined the case in detail and allowed post arrest bail to the applicant on the premise that there was
long standing tribal feud between the complainant and applicant party The record does not reflect that the applicant is nominated in the alleged incident However, his name was disclosed by two witnesses Bhooro and Melao in their 161 Cr.P.C statements recorded on 18.01.2019, wherein they claim that the applicant while taking with co-accused had confessed his guilt. It is Further, alleged that the applicant made extra judicial confession before police as well. However, it is well settled law that the extra judicial confession before police is inadmissible in evidence as provided under Article 38 of Qanoo-e-Shahdat. So far as the confession of applicant before the witnesses is concerned the same is yet to be tested during cross exanimation at the trial. Furthermore, the enmity is admitted between the parties. The aforesaid factual position of the case requires further inquiry as provided under Section 497 (2) Cr.P.C. Prima-facie, the Applicant has made out a case for post-arrest bail in the aforesaid crime at this stage.

7. In view of above facts and circumstances, instant bail application is allowed and the applicant is admitted to post-arrest bail in crime No.211/2018, for offences punishable under Section 302, 114, 148, 149 PPC, registered at P.S. Ubauro, subject to furnishing his solvent surety in the sum of Rs.300, 000/- (rupees three lac) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

8. The above findings are tentative in nature which shall not prejudice the case of either party during the course of trial.

JUDGE

Faisal Mumtaz/PS