ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-348 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

10.09.2020.

Mr. Abdul Faheem Thaheem, Advocate for the applicant

Mr. Farhat Ali Bugti, Advocate for the complainant

Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

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

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, by committing into house of complainant attempting to commit theft of his Cow and on resistance caused lathi blows to PW Yaqoob, for that the present case was registered.

2.        The applicant, on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kashmore, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application u/s.497 Cr.PC.

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 satisfy its previous dispute over Karap with him; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about one day; the identity of the applicant under the light of bulb is weak piece of evidence and the injuries sustained by PW Yaqoob are not falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail as his case is calling for further inquiry. In support of his contention he relied upon cases of Shammon alias Samandar Vs. The State (2007 MLD-294) and  Jamsher Mazari Vs. The State (2009 YLR-387).

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

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 having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. No incident of theft has taken place. The identity of the applicant under light of bulb is weak piece of evidence. The injuries sustained by the injured are not falling within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.PC. There is no recovery of lathi. In these circumstances, the guilt of the applicant obviously is calling for further inquiry.

7.        In view of above, the applicant is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

8.        The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                     J U D G E