ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Crl.Bail Appln.No.D-29 of 2021.
_________________________________________________________________
DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE
_________________________________________________________________
Before:
Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah,
Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi,
For hearing of bail application.
05.01.2022
Mr. Azhar Hussain Abbasi, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G for the State.
= * = * = * = * = * =
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that PWs Inayatullah and Naqeebullah were abducted by dacoits Khairo alias Khair Muhammad and his associates with aid and abetment of the applicants and co-accused Tego Khan. The police party of P.S Napar Kot, led by Inspector Syed Ameer Ali Shah, in order to secure release of the said abductees, went at the place of incident and during course of an armed encounter with the culprits involved in the said abduction, P.C Munawar Ali, PC Abdul Khaliq and Photographer Abdul Haseeb Shaikh lost their lives while PC Asadullah sustained fire shot injuries at the hands of culprits involved in the said abduction, who then made their escape good by causing damage to Armored Personnel Carrier (APC) and misappropriating the official rifles and bullet proof jackets of police officials, who sustained fire shot injuries and lost their lives, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicants, on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned Incharge Judge, Anti Terrorism Court, Shikarpur, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application u/s.498 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 at the instance of their political rivals; even otherwise, the role attributed to the applicants in commission of the incident is only to the extent of conspiracy/abetment and co-accused Tego Khan with utmost similar role has already been admitted to post-arrest bail by learned trial Court, therefore, the applicants are entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry/consistency and malafide. In support of his contentions, he relied upon cases of Syed Amanullah Shah Vs. The State and another (PLD 1996 S.C-241) and Kazim Ali and others Vs. The State and others (2021 SCMR-2086).
4. Learned D.P.G for the State has opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants by contending that the principles for grant of pre and post arrest bail are quite different and the police party was having no reason to have involved the applicants in commission of above said incident falsely, which is heinous in nature.
5. We have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. Apparently, the applicants have not participated in commission of the incident in person; the role attributed to them in commission of the incident is only to the extent of abetment/conspiracy. Whether, they actually have abetted/conspired the above said incident? It requires determination at trial. Co-accused Tego Khan with utmost similar role has already been admitted to post-arrest bail by learned trial Court, therefore, no useful purpose would be served, if the applicants are taken into custody and then are admitted to bail on point of consistency, particularly when they are alleging their involvement in the incident to be false and motivated.
7. In case of Muhammad Ramzan Vs. Zafarullah and another (1986 SCMR-1380), it was held by the Honourable Court that;
“no useful purpose was likely to be served if bail of accused(respondent) was cancelled on any technical ground because after arrest he could again be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed other accused were already on bail”.
8. In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
9. The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE
JUDGE