ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-420 of 2021.

_____________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

______________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

09.12.2021

                        Mrs. Akhtiar Begum, Advocate for the applicant.

                        Mr. Syed Tahir Abbas Shah, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

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 murder of Asadullah by causing him fire shot injuries but caused fire shot injuries to PWs Safdar Ali and Mst.Mumtaz Khatoon, with intention to commit their murder and then went away by makings fires at complainant Zuhaib Hussain and in air to create harassment, for that the present case was registered.

2.         The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned             6^th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant 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; he is in custody for more than two years and co-accused Gulzar with similar role has already been admitted to bail by this Court; therefore, the applicant is entitled to his release on bail on point of further enquiry and consistency.

4.         Learned Addl.P.G for the State has recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicant while learned counsel for the complainant has opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that he has actively participated in commission of the incident by causing fire shot injury to PW Safdar Ali and on arrest from him has been secured the crime weapon.

5.         In rebuttal to above, it is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the weapon has been foisted upon the applicant by the police at the instance of the complainant. 

6.         I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

7.         Co-accused Gulzar on being let off by the police was joined in trial and he then was admitted to bail by this Court. As per FIR, the role attributed to the applicant and co-accused Gulzar is identical. Be that as it may, the applicant is attributed the role of causing unspecified fire shot injury to PW Safdar Ali. The parties are already disputed over matrimonial affairs. The case has finally been challaned and there is no apprehension of tampering with the evidence, on the part of the applicant. The applicant is said to be in custody for more than two years. In these circumstances, a case for grant of bail to the applicant on point of further enquiry and consistency obviously is made out and such concession could hardly be denied to the applicant only for the reason that from him has been recovered the incriminating pistol, particularly when it is alleged to have been foisted upon him.

8.         In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum Rs.500,000/- and PR bonds in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

9.         The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                             JUDGE