ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-562 of 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

07.02.2022

                        Mr. Abdullah Kehar, Advocate for the applicant.

Complainant Saddam Hussain in person.

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, during course of robbery of buffaloes of complainant Saddam Hussain, caused fire shot injury to PW Ahmed, 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 old and infirm person has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant to satisfy his enmity with him over the landed property and the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of more than two months; therefore, he is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

                        Learned Addl.P.G for the State who is assisted by the complainant has opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he is vicariously liable for the commission of the incident.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of more than two months and 161 Cr.PC statement of PW Ahmed has been recorded with further delay of eight days even to FIR; such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The identity of the applicant under solar light bulb is appearing to be weak piece of evidence. Nothing has been brought on record, which may prove the ownership of the complainant over the buffaloes allegedly robbed. The case has finally been challaned; the applicant has joined the trial and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of pre-arrest bail on his part. In these circumstances, the applicant is found entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

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

                        The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E