ORDER
SHEET
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Bail
Application No.S-418 of 2021
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Applicant: Punhal Chachar
through Mr. Ali Anwar Chachar,
Advocate
Complainant: Nemo
State: Through
Mr.Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, DPG
Date of
hearing: 16.08.2021
Dated of
order: 16.08.2021
O R D E R
Zulfiqar
Ali Sangi, J: Applicant/accused Punhal son of Nawab, is seeking
pre-arrest bail in FIR No.152/2021, registered at Police Station ‘A’ Section Ghotki,
under sections 337-F(v) and 34 PPC. His earlier pre-arrest
bail plea was declined by the learned I-Additional Sessions Judge (MCTC) Ghotki,
vide order dated 29.06.2021. After rejection of his bail application, he
approached this court for the same relief.
2. As
per FIR, the allegation against the applicant is that he has caused blow of
iron pipe at left arm of the complainant.
3. Learned
counsel for the applicant submits that there is four days delay in registration
of the FIR which has not been explained by the complainant; that the FIR was
registered after issuance of medical certificate; that the injury caused by the
applicant is on non-vital part of the complainant and punishment for such
injury is up to five years which does not fall within prohibitory clause of
section 497 Cr.P.C; that the applicant has been implicated with malafide
intention. Lastly he prayed that the interim
pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed.
4.
Learned Deputy Prosecutor General conceded for confirmation of pre-arrest in
view of the facts that the punishment provided for the offence is up to five
years and does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record with their able assistance.
6. Admittedly there is delay of four
days in registration of FIR, which has not been properly explained. Further the
offence does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Grant of bail in these cases is rule and
refusal is an exception. However, strong reasons for refusal are required.
7. In
view of the above coupled with the no objection given by learned DPG for the
state, I am of the view that the applicant has made out the case for
confirmation of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail
already granted to the applicant / accused by this court vide order dated 05.07.2021,
is hereby confirmed on same terms
and conditions.
8. Observations made herein above are
tentative in nature and will not cause any prejudice to either party at the
trial.
9. Instant Criminal Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms.
JUDGE
Suleman Khan/PA