ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-282 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

07.08.2020.

Mr. Ashiq Ali Jatoi, Advocate for the applicants

            Mr. Nisar Ahmed Abro, Advocate for the complainant

Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

                        ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~

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, caused lathi and hatchet (with its back side) blows to PWs Ghulam Fareed and Zamir Hussain, for that the present case was registered.

2.                    The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Qamber, has prayed for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s 498 Cr.P.C.

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 in order to satisfy his family dispute with them; there is counter version of the incident and the offence alleged 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 for grant of bail to the applicants, while learned counsel for the complainant has sought for dismissal of the instant bail application by contending that the applicants are vicariously liable for the commission of the incident. 

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

6.                    The FIR has been recorded by the police without waiting for the opinion with regard to the nature of injuries, which appears to be significant; the parties admittedly are disputed over matrimonial affairs and there is counter version of the incident, which party is aggressor or aggressed upon? It requires determination at trial. In that situation, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicants that a case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants is made out on the point of further inquiry and malafide.

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