ORDER SHEET
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Cr. Bail Application No.997 of 2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Order with Signature(s) of Judge(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For hearing of Bail Application.
M/s Ali Gohar Masroof & Muhammad Abrar Arain, Advocates for Applicant.
Ms. Rahat Ahsan, Additional P.G. Sindh
Date of hearing : 08.8.2019
Date of Order : 08.8.2019
ORDER
Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J. – Applicant Majeed son of Ismail Memon seeks post arrest bail in case under FIR No.11/2018 registered under Sections 302, 504 & 34 PPC at Police Station Keti Bunder, Thatta.
2. Bail application of the present applicant was dismissed by the learned I-Additional Sessions Judge, Thatta, vide his order dated 07.6.2018, hence the instant bail application.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case as unfolded in the FIR are that on 21.02.2018 at 2230 hours, complainant Ahmed son of Jumoon b/c Memon appeared at police station Keti Bunder and lodged FIR stating therein that he works as labour. Hafeez son of Sulleman b/c Memon and are very close relatives and their small children fought with each other, therefore, they made them understand many times but there was no control on their children. Yesterday i.e. 20.02.2018, he (complainant) and his brother were available at their house, in the meantime someone called outside from the street, as such, they (complainant party) went outside the house and noticed everyone Majeed son of Ismail Memon having hatchet, Hafeez son of Suleman b/c Memon with hatchet, whereas Jameel was armed with pistol. It was at about 1630 hours, the accused persons abusing them asked as to why they did not make their children understand; who fight with their children and they back bite them, to whom the complainant and his brother Gul Muhammad restrained them not to abuse and be gentlemen. On commotion, complainant’s close relatives everyone Ghulam Qadir Memon and Ramzan Memon came there and made hakals to accused persons, not to fight, but in the meantime accused Jameel Memon did straight fire with pistol upon his brother Gul Muhammad, which hit on his head. He fell down on the earth and was expired at-once. After that complainant party informed the police. The police arrived and took the dead body to hospital. After postmortem, the dead body was handed over to them for funeral ceremony.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant/ accused has argued that present accused is innocent and has been falsely booked by the complainant due to enmity. He further submitted that no active role of causing any injury has been attributed to the applicant/ accused; except that he was present with hatchet at the scene of occurrence. The learned counsel has further contended that as per contents of the FIR, deceased Gul Muhammad was murdered by means of firearm weapon, which was allegedly made by co-accused Jameel Memon. The present accused has been falsely implicated due to enmity, which is admitted by the complainant himself in the FIR. He submitted that prior to instant FIR, the FIR No.10/2018 of the same incident was lodged by one Mst. Haleema; relative of the present accused and the instant FIR was lodged in order to pressurize them to withdraw the FIR No.10/2018, hence the matter requires further inquiry.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional P.G. Sindh appearing on behalf of the State submitted that there are ample material available on record, which connects the present accused with the commission of the offence. She submitted that the present accused shared common intention with the co-accused and he was armed with hatchet at the time of incident, hence equally liable for the cause of murder of deceased, therefore, does not deserve to be admitted to bail.
6. After hearing the parties and perusing the record, it has been noticed that the only allegation against the applicant is that of his presence at the spot, armed with hatchet. Neither he caused any injury to deceased or complainant party during the whole affairs. In the circumstances of the case, the question with regard to vicarious liability of the applicant is yet to be resolved by the trial Court after proper appreciation of evidence. It appears from the record that applicant is behind the bar for the last one and half years and during this long period, no substantial progress has been made in trial. Hatchet was also not recovered from the applicant/ accused. Finding the case of the applicant to be one of further inquiry within the purview of sub-section 2 of Section 497 CrPC, the instant application is allowed and applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
7. Needless to mention here that observations, if any, made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the trial court while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits.
JUDGE
asim/pa