IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH CIRCUIT COURT,

LARKANA.

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 316 of 2021.

Applicant:             Ghazi son of Ali Mardan Jatoi, through Mr. Shahbaz Ali Brohi, Advocate.

The State:             Through, Mr. Muhammad Noonari, DPG.

Date of hearing:    02.08.2021.

Date of order:        02.08.2021.

O R D E R

Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J: -vide order dated 08.05.2021, whereby post-arrest bail was refused to the applicant by the learned the Sessions Judge Shikarpur in F.I.R No.24/2021, offense under sections 302, 311, 201, 34 P.P.C., registered at Police Station Rustam (District Shikarpur). Through the instant bail application, the applicant is now asking for post-arrest bail in the aforesaid crime based on two affidavits of eyewitnesses namely MST RazulKhatoon and MST Jatni, however, the aforesaid stance of the applicant was discarded by the learned trial court as discussed supra.

2.       The accusation against the applicant is that on 30.3.2021, he along with his accomplice committed the Murder of his wife namely MSTSardarKhatoon by strangulating her based on the allegations of Karo-Kari and disposed of her dead bodyin the River to save his skin from the clutches of law. Such a report of the incident was received by the Police Station Rustam on 31.3. 2021 andsuch F.I.R No.24/2021, for offenses under sections 302, 311, 201, 34 P.P.C., was registered accordingly. The applicant’s Bail Application No.525 of 2021 was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 8.5.2021 on the plea that the applicant had committed the murder of deceased wife on the allegations of Karo-Kari and disposed of her dead body in the River to save his skin from the clutches of law.

3.       The applicant has premised his case based on affidavits of MST RazulKhatoon and MST Jatni both are stated to be Eye Witnesses of the alleged murder of Mst SardarKhatoon now (deceased) who was allegedly killed by the Applicant on 30.3.2021 in her house by strangulation.

4.       Mr. Shahbaz Ali Brohi learned counsel for the applicant has argued that Eye Witnesses of the alleged murder of Mst SardarKhatoon have sworn an affidavit before the learned trial court to the effect that on a fateful day the culprits were muffled who fired upon the deceased Mst SardarKhatoon, thus they could not identify them. He has further averred that the eyewitnesses have no objection if the applicant is enlarged on post-arrest bail in the subject crime. Learned counsel added that the applicant/accused is mistakenly nominated in the FIR by the police due to which the eyewitnesses have exonerated the applicant/accused of the offense of murder at the hands of the applicant, therefore, the present applicant is liable to be admitted to bail. He further argued that the offenses falling under Chapter XVI of P.P.C. and mentioned in the schedule under section 345, Cr.P.C. even if committed in the name of "ghayrat" "Karo Kari", "Sayah Kari" and similar other customs, are compoundable and may be waived; that the eyewitnesses of the incident frankly contend that the offense in question was not in consequence of Karo Kari and siyakari',rather she was killed by unknown assailants who were muffled, hence the applicant is entitled to post-arrest bail. The learned counsel further argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case by the police just to show their efficiency; that there is no recovery of the dead body of the deceased; that nothing is available with the prosecution to connect the applicant with the alleged disappearance of the deadbody of the deceased Mst Sardar; that there is no reasonable ground to believe that the applicant has committed the offense of murder of his wife by strangulation.He prayed for allowing the instant bail application.

5.       Mr. Muhammad Noonari, DPG pointed out that section 311, P.P.C., has been inserted by the police in the FIR; that the said section provides punishment as Ta'zir for the offender and keeping in view the facts and circumstances, the principle of Fasad-file-Arz is attracted, as the murder of deceased was on the pretext of Karo-Kari and siyakari', He further contended that it is a murder of a young girl caused by his husband, hence the applicant is not entitled to the concession of bail at this stage. He pointed out that Prosecution witnesses have supported the version of the complainant under section 161 Cr.P.C statements, such machinimas of the place of wardat as well as disposing of the deadbody of deceased in River Indus were prepared by the police; that the Applicant filed Bail Application before the learned Trial Court, and the said Bail Application was dismissed vide order dated 8.5.2021 as such this Bail Application before this court is almost on the same grounds. He added that the incident is of a heinous offense, punishable with Death and Life Imprisonment, and the deponents of Affidavits, who are slated to be eyewitnesses, have narrated different stories of the incident, either in their respective affidavits and/or before this court, such narration and their abortive attempt to create doubt in the prosecution story, cannot be of any help to the Applicant at the Bail stage. He prayed for the dismissal of the instant bail application.

6.       I have heard the arguments of learned Counsel for the Applicant and learned DPG, who opposed the grant of Bail to the applicant by narrating the aforesaid factual as well as the legal aspect of the case.

7.       To go ahead on the subject, it appears from the perusal of the material placed on record that deceased Mst SardarKhatoon, who was the wife of the applicant, was done to death in the house of the applicant and prima-false allegations against him are that he along with his accomplice killed her on the pretext of Karo-Kari and siyakari'. The specific role of causing the death of MstSardarKhatoonhas been ascribed to the applicant/accused. It further appears that the Police have recorded the statements of MST RazulKhatoon and MST Jatniunder section 161, Cr.P.C. both have categorically nominated the applicant/accused in the commission of the offense.Even such mashirnamas of the place of wardat as well as disposing of the deadbody of deceased in River Indus were prepared by the police during the investigation. Prima-facie the ocular as well as circumstantial evidence available on the record, connect the applicant/accused in the commission of the crime.The factum of filing of affidavits in favor of the applicant/accused, speaks about the contumacious conduct of the applicant/accused, who has been found in a policeinvestigation as an actual culprit of themurder of his real wife that he is making every effort to save his skin from the case. The trend is that eyewitnesses take somersault and give statements that are different from the prosecution case and file affidavit at the stage of hearing of bailapplication to create doubt in the prosecution case to enable the accused to get the bail has been deprecated by the Honorable Supreme Court from time to time.

8.       For the foregoing reasons, I am of the considered view that the applicant/accused is not entitled to post-arrest bail at this stage. Consequently, the bail application stands dismissed.

9.       The findings mentioned above are tentative which shall not prejudice the case of either party at the trial stage. However, the learned trial Court is directed to record evidence of the parties preferably within four (4) months and submit a compliance report, through the Additional Registrar of this Court within the stipulated period.

J U D G E