ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-259 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

10.08.2020.

Mr. Syed Lal Shah, Advocate for the applicant

Mr. Himath Ali Gadehi, Advocate for the complainant

Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of  culprits, in furtherance of their common intention caused butt, danda and fire shot injuries to PW Muhammad Hassan with intention to commit his murder, for that the present case was registered.

2.        The applicant, on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application u/s 498 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 in order to satisfy his dispute with him over landed property and fish pond; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about one day; the injury is self suffered and it is bailable in nature. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicant on point of further inquiry and malafide.

4.        Learned D.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that he is attributed the role of causing fire shot injury to PW Muhammad Hassan.

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

6.        The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day and such delay could not be overlooked. The injuries sustained by PW Muhammad Hassan are opined to be bailable in its nature by medical officer, Taluka Hospital, K.N.Shah. Whether bailable injuries have been caused to the said injured with intention to commit murder? It requires determination at trial. The identity of the applicant at night time even otherwise under torch light is appearing to be weak piece of evidence. The parties are already disputed over the landed property and fish pond. In that situation, malafide to involve the applicant in false case on the part of the complainant party could not be ruled out.

7.        In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

8.        Needless to say that the observation recorded above is tentative in nature and same may not affect the case of either party at trial.

9.        The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                         JUDGE