IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT

LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 590 of 2020.

Date of hearing:             18.01.2021.

Applicant:                      Ahsan son of Muneer Chandio, through Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, Advocate.

Respondent:                   The State through Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General.

Complainant:                 Tarique Hussain, present in person.

O R D E R

ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J.   Through captioned bail application, applicant-accused Ahsan son of Muneer Chandio seeks his admission to post-arrest bail in a case vide Crime No.04/2020 registered with P.S Dakhan (District Shikarpur) for offences punishable under Sections 324, 114, 337-H (2), 148 & 149 P.P.C.

          The facts of the case according to F.I.R lodged by complainant Tarique Hussain on 07.1.2020 at 1400 with P.S Dakhan are that there existed murderous enmity between him and accused Ahsan Chandio and others. According to complainant, he cultivates land of Raza Ali Chandio, where he had sowed wheat crop and on 05.01.2020, the complainant, his aunt Mst. Khadija and maternal aunt Mst. Asia were irrigating their crop, when at 4.30 p.m. there came accused Ahsan, Jam, Zamir, Nazir, Nazir son of Janib, Abdul Hayee alias Dibar, Allah Bachayo having guns, Zubair, Ismail, Ubaid, Abdul Fatah, Khan alias Babu, Akhtar, Rahib, Raja, Ali Dost having kalashnikov type rifles; and on instigation of accused Jam, the applicant-accused Ahsan fired from his gun which hit  complainant on his leg and he fell down, while rest of the accused are alleged to have made aerial firing and went away. The complainant rushed to hospital at Madeji town, from where he was referred to CMC Hospital, Larkana and ultimately he came back to police-station and lodged F.I.R to the above effect.

          Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that F.I.R is delayed for two days without offering any plausible explanation; that no independent person has been cited as witness; that murderous enmity between the parties is admitted by complainant in the F.I.R and in background of previous enmity false implication of applicant cannot be ruled out; that Section 324 P.P.C is not applicable in this case as applicant is alleged to have made single fire which it complainant on his leg, which is not-vital part; that applicant-accused is not alleged to have repeated the fire and nothing incriminating has been secured from possession of the applicant-accused and that the prosecution witnesses are not appearing before the trial Court for recording their evidence and applicant is wandering in jail since long without any progress in trial of the case. According to learned counsel, in these circumstances the case of applicant falls within ambit of further enquiry as envisaged in Section 497 (2) Cr.P.C. Accordingly, he prays for grant of bail to applicant.

          On the other hand, learned D.P.G. opposed the grant of bail to  applicant on the grounds that name of applicant transpired in the F.I.R with specific role; that the applicant directly fired from gun upon the complainant which hit him; that ocular evidence is supported by medical evidence; that enmity is double-edges weapon which cuts both the sides. In these circumstances, he prayed that bail application of the applicant may be dismissed.

          Heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available in the record.

          It is observed that 1^st bail application of applicant Ahsan was declined by the Court of Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, vide order dated 30.02.2020 and bail was granted to accused Abdul Fatah under the same order. The applicant repeated his bail plea before the same Court and again the result was same and was dismissed vide order dated 09.11.2020.

          As per crime report (F.I.R) the applicant directly fired from his gun upon the complainant which hit him. Applicant Ahsan was arrested on 25.1.2020 and gun used in the commission of offence with three live cartridges was recovered from his possession. During investigation the police also recovered the empties of cartridges from the place of  incident and investigation officer sent recovered gun and the empties for FSL and the FSL report is positive. Ocular account furnished by the complainant and the witnesses is supported by the medical evidence. All these aspects of the case connect applicant with the commission of alleged offence. It is settled law that bail application is to be decided on the basis of material available on record tentatively by assessing the same and deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible at the bail stage.

          From the tentative assessment of material available on record it appears that the applicant is connected with the commission of offence. Resultant, this bail application stands dismissed. Parting with this order, it made clear that observations made herein-above are tentative in nature and would not influence trial Court while deciding the case on merits.

                                                Judge

Ansari