ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-382 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

07.09.2020

Mr. Shahbaz Ali Brohi, Advocate for the applicant

                        Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of    the culprits, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, not only committed Qatl-e-Amd of Naseer Ahmed and Habibullah by causing them fire shot injuries but caused fire shot injuries to PWs Hazaro and Karamullah, with intention to commit their murder, for that the present case was registered.

2.        The applicant on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, 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 in order to settle their matrimonial dispute with him; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day and the role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent that he has caused fire shot injury to PW Hazaro on his right knee. 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 has opposed to grant of bail to applicant by contending that the applicant has actively participated in commission of the incident by causing fire shot injury to PW Hazaro with intention to commit his murder and then has remained in absconsion for noticeable period.

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. The role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent that he caused fire shot injury to PW Hazaro on his right knee, it is not vital part of body. Surprisingly, PW Hazaro is not examined by the police under section 161 Cr.PC. There is no mashirnama of injuries or medical certificate which may suggest that PW Hazaro has actually sustained fire shot injury on his right knee during course of the incident. The parties are already disputed over matrimonial affairs. In these circumstances, the guilt of the applicant is calling for further inquiry. 

7.                    In case of Mitho Pitafi vs. The State (2009 SCMR-299), it has been by the Honourable Apex Court that;

“Bail could be granted, if accused had good case for bail on merits and mere his absconsion would not come in the way while granting him bail---High Court had not appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case in its true perspective while declining bail to the petitioner”.

8.                    In view of the facts and reasons discussed above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.  

9.                    The instant application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                               J U D G E