ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-579 of 2021.

_____________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

______________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

10.02.2022

                        Mr. Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Kalhoro, A.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, committed murder of Manzoor, Riaz, Muhammad Ibrahim and Muhammad Sharif by causing them fire shot injuries and then went away by causing fire shot injuries to PW Ahsan Ali with intention to commit his murder and making aerial firing to create harassment, for that the present case was registered.

2.         The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned             Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, 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 in order to satisfy its old enmity; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day and the role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent of making aerial firing to create harassment. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry.

4.         None has appeared on behalf of the complainant despite service of notice. However, learned A.P.G. for the State has opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that the applicant is vicariously liable for the commission of the incident and on arrest from him has been secured the crime weapon.

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

6.         The role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent of making aerial firing; therefore, the vicarious liability on his part in commission of the incident is calling for its determination at trial. The case has finally been challaned. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended that the guilt of the applicant in commission of the incident is calling for further inquiry.

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

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

                                                                             JUDGE