ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-586 of 2021.

_________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

23.12.2021

                        Mr. Athar Abbas Solangi, Advocate for the applicants.

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

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged by the applicants with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention, committed murder of Mst.Parveen,      by strangulating her throat over allegation of Karap and then put her dead body on flame to give it cover of a suicide, thereby they attempted to destroy the evidence in order to save themselves from legal consequences, for that the present case was registered.

2.         The applicants, on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned 4^th Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under section 497 Cr.PC.

3.         It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police, otherwise they have nothing to do with the alleged incident and co-accused Mst.Uzma with utmost similar role has already been admitted to pre-arrest bail by this Court. By contending so, he sought for post-arrest bail for the applicants on point of further inquiry and consistency.

4.         Learned Addl.P.G for the State has opposed to grant of bail to the applicants by contending that they have actively participated in commission of the alleged incident.

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

6.         Initially, the death of the deceased was reported as suicide. The FIR of the incident has been lodged by the police on behalf of the State after due inquiry that too with delay of about seven months, which appears to be surprising. The complainant is not an eye witness of the incident. No specific role in commission of the incident even otherwise is attributed to the applicants. Co-accused Mst.Uzma with utmost similar role has already been admitted to pre-arrest bail by this Court. The case has finally been challaned. There is no allegation of tampering with the evidence on the part of applicants. In these circumstances, a case for grant of post-arrest bail to applicants on point of further inquiry and consistency obviously is made out.

7.         In view of above, the applicants are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum Rs.200,000/- each and P.R bonds in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

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

                                                                                                 JUDGE