ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-614 of 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

17.02.2022

                        Mr. Dildar Ali Chandio, Advocate for the applicant.

                        Mr. Abdul Hakeem Brohi, Advocate for the complainant.

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, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, committed murder of Ghulam Sarwar, by causing him fire shot injuries and then went away by causing fire shot injuries to PWs Mushtaq Ahmed and Bakhat Ali with intention to commit their murder too and making aerial firing to create harassment, for that the present case was registered. 

                        The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned           3^rd Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, 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 has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party in order to satisfy its matrimonial dispute with him; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about six hours and the role attributed to the applicant in commission of the incident is only to the extent of causing fire shot injury to PW Bakhat Ali on his left hand, therefore, he is entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on the point of malafide.

                        Learned Addl.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he has actively participated in commission of the incident by causing fire shot injury to PW Bakhat Ali and after commission of the incident, he has gone in absconsion for about 18 months. In support of their contentions, they have relied upon case of Zafar Hussain Vs. The State and another           (2014 SCMR-1591).

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The applicant is named in FIR with specific allegation that he with rest of the culprits, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, went over to the complainant party and then committed murder of Ghulam Sarwar by causing him fire shot injuries and then went away by causing fire shot injury to PWs Bakhat Ali and Mushtaq Ahmed with intention to commit their murder too. The specific role of causing fire shot injury to PW Bakhat Ali on his left hand is attributed to the applicant. By such injury PW Bakhat Ali has sustained fracture of two fingers of his left hand. In that situation, it would be pre-mature to say that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party. The dispute between the parties over matrimonial affairs may be there but it may not be a reason to involve the applicant in this case falsely. The delay of about six hours in lodgment of the FIR is explained in FIR itself and same even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. The applicant has not been able to explain plausibly the considerable absconsion on his part. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence, with which he has been charged.

                        No case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant is made out. Consequently, the instant criminal bail application is dismissed.

      JUDGE