ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-547 of 2021.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

20.12.2021

                        Syed Lal Shah, Advocate for the applicant.

Khuwaja Khairuddin Dero, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged by the prosecution that the applicant with rest of the culprits, subjected PW Altaf Hussain to rape, for that the present case was registered.

2.         The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned             4^th Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, 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 police; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day and the medical and DNA profile are not suggesting the commission of rape with the victim, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry.

4.         Learned D.P.G. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have recorded no objection to release of the applicant on bail. By stating so, they caused filing of affidavit of complainant Roshan Ali to such effect.

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. The medical certificate is not supporting the allegation of rape with the victim. The DNA profile of the victim is not matching with the blood sample of the applicant. The complainant now by filing his affidavit has recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicant by stating therein that he is innocent.  In these circumstances,   a case for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry obviously is made out.

7.                     In case of Muhammad Najeeb Vs. The State (2009 SCMR-448), it has been held by the Honourable Apex court that;

“Though initially petitioner was nominated in the F.I.R. by the complainant as an accused but later on through affidavit he stated that he is satisfied with regard to the innocence of the petitioner and does not want to proceed with the matter. This aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration by the Courts below. We without touching the merits of the case are of the view that case of petitioner is of further inquiry.”

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

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

                                                                                                 JUDGE