ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-396 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

20.08.2020.

Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, Advocate for applicants

Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that applicants with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, caused lathies and butt blows to complainant Munawar Ali, PWs Ghulam Murtaza and Muhammad Ibrahim and then went away by insulting and threatening them of murder, for that the present case was registered.

2.                    The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 6^th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, 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 party in order to satisfy their old enmity with them; the nature of the injuries was determined by the police itself without waiting for the medical opinion; the offence alleged against the applicants is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC and co-accused Babu Ghulam Sarwar and four others have already been admitted to bail. 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.

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

6.                    The nature of the injuries was determined by the police itself without waiting for medical opinion, which appears to be significant. The parties admittedly are disputed with each other. The offence alleged against the applicants is not falling within the prohibitory clause and co-accused Babu Ghulam Sarwar and four others have already been admitted to bail. 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