ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-350 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

07.08.2020

Mr.Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate for the applicant

                        Mr.Mazhar Ali Bhutto, Advocate for complainant

Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention, committed Qatl-e-Amd of Masood Ali by causing him lathi blows and then went away by causing lathi blows to PW Majid Sarwar, in order to satisfy their previous grudge with them, for that the present case was registered.

2.        The applicant on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratodero, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s 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; FIR has been lodged with unexplained delay of about one day and the role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent of causing unspecified lathi blow to the deceased. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry.

4.        Learned D.P.G. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that the applicant has actively participated in commission of the incident by causing lathi blows to the  deceased.

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

6.        The name of the applicant is appearing in the FIR with specific allegation that he with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention, caused lathi blows to the deceased, as result whereof he died. No doubt, lathi blows by the applicant to the deceased is unspecified but it constitutes an act of vicarious liability on his part. On arrest from the applicant has also been secured the lathi which he used in commission of the incident. 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. The delay in lodgment of FIR by one day of course is there but it is explained in FIR itself, the same even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence for which he is charged.

7.                    No case for grant of bail to the applicant is made out. Consequently, the instant bail application is dismissed.

                                     J U D G E