ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-658 of 2020

Cr. Bail Application No.S-104 of 2021

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

           

 

Applicants:                                 Deen Muhammad, Eidan and Allah Bux @ Shoukat, through M/s Deedar Ali Chohan and Muhammad Ali Dayo, Advocates

 

Complainant:                             Ali Murad Khoso,

                                                  Through Syed Tanveer Abbas Shah,

                                                  Advocate

 

State:                                         Through Mr.Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, DPG

 

Date of hearing:                         09.08.2021

 

Dated of order:                           09.08.2021

                                                 

 

O R D E R

 

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through instant applications, applicants/accused Din Muhammad, Eidan and Allah Bux seek pre-arrest bail in FIR No.57/2020, registered at Police Station Wasti Jiwan Shah, under sections 354-A, 324, 114, 147, 148 and 149 PPC.  Applicants/accused approached for bail to the learned Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC Ubauro, which was declined vide order dated 22.10.2020.

2.           Facts of the case as per FIR lodged by complainant Ali Murad Khoso, on 30.09.2020, at 2100 hours are that on the same day his wife Mst. Rabia was cutting grass from cotton crop in  their land while he, PWs Ali Hassan Khoso and Muhammad Qasim Khoso were standing at some distance for looking after  the cotton crop, when at about 1230 hours, they heard cries of Mst. Rabia on which they went running there and saw accused Shoukat, Rasool Bux, who were holding the arms of Mst. Rabia while accused Abdul Jabbar had put his hand in her shirt in order to dishonor her and her shirt was torn. Complainant party challenged them on which the accused party went away. Meanwhile accused Deen Muhammad, Pir Bux both armed with Kalashnikovs and Eidan armed with hatchet came there and on the instigation of accused Eidan, accused Deen Muhammad made straight fire with Kalashnikov at PW Ali Hassan which hit him at his left shoulder and accused Peer Bux fired with Kalashnikov at PW Muhammad Qasim which hit him at his left elbow. Thereafter all the accused person went away. Complainant took the injured to Police Station from where they were referred to hospital and then the complainant lodged the above F.I.R.

3.           Learned counsel for the applicants submit that there is delay of 08 hours in the registration of FIR and the same has not been explained by the complainant; that as per the medical certificates the injuries received by the injured persons are punishable up to 03 years, which do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C; that section 354-A is not applicable in the present case and its applicability will be decided by the trial court after recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Lastly, he prayed that interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants may be confirmed.

4.           Learned counsel for the complainant and the DPG for the State have opposed the confirmation of bail of the applicants on the grounds that the applicants are nominated in the FIR with specific roles; that the delay in registration of FIR has been explained by the complainant; that section 354-A, PPC fully attracted to the case of the applicants; that no malafide has been pointed out by the applicants on the part of complainant or the investigating officer; that ocular evidence is supported by the medical evidence. Lastly they prayed that bail applications of the applicants may be dismissed.

5.           I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record with their able assistance.

6.           Section 354-A of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 is not applicable in the present case, firstly, the alleged offence was committed at the lands of the complainant party and the same was not a public place, secondly, the victim was not exposed to the public view and both the conditions are necessary to attract the section 354-A PPC.  As regards to the applicability of section 324 PPC, evidence is required to be recorded by the trial court as from the material available in the record it does not indicate that the applicants repeated the blows upon the injured witnesses.  The injuries caused to the injured persons as per medical evidence are punishable up to 03 years and does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(2) Cr.P.C. The grant of bail in cases covered under the said provision is rule and refusal is an exception. Reliance is placed in cases of Tariq Bashir v. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34) and Muhammad Tanveer V. The State and another (PLD 2017 SC 733).

7.        The deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible at the stage of bail and the same is to be decided tentatively. From the tentative assessment of material available on record the applicants have made out their case for confirmation of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, instant bail applications are allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the applicants vide orders dated 05.11.2020 and 15-02-2021 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

8.                           The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature only for the purpose of deciding the instant bail applications, which shall not, in any manner, influence the learned Trial Court at the time of final decision of the subject case.

9.       The above bail applications are disposed of in the above terms.

 

 

                                                                             JUDGE

 

 

 

Suleman Khan/PA