ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-268 of 2021.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

20.10.2021

                        Mr. Mashkoor Hussain Unar, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. Prosecutor General for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of culprits in furtherance of their common intention by committing trespass into house of complainant Sobo, caused him fired shot injury on his left index finger with intention to commit his murder and then went away by making aerial firing to create harassment, for that the present case was registered.

                        The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498-A Cr.PC.

                        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 his matrimonial dispute with him; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about four days and the medical evidence is in conflict with ocular evidence, therefore, the applicant is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on the point of malafide.

                        Learned Additional Prosecutor General for the State has recorded no objection to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about four days and such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The identity of the applicant under the light of solar bulb is appearing to be weak piece of evidence. The injury which the complainant allegedly has suffered has been caused to him with some hard blunt substance, as is opined by the medical officer in his final medical certificate. The case has finally been challaned. The applicant has joined the trial. In these circumstances, it would be unjustified to deny the concession of pre-arrest bail to the applicant particularly when he is claiming to have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant only to settle with him his matrimonial dispute.

                        In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

                        The instant bail application is disposed off accordingly.

J U D G E