ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-494 of 2021

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

           

 

Applicants:                                 Yaseen Maitlo, through

                                                  Mr. Imtiaz Ali Chadhar, Advocate

 

Complainant:                             Morial Maitlo, through

                                                  Mr. Manzoor Hussain Mahessar,

                                                  Advocate

 

State:                                         Through Mr.Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, DPG

 

Date of hearing:                         10.09.2021

Dated of order:                           10.09.2021

                                                 

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J:  Through instant bail application, applicant Yaseen s/o Muhammad Sobal Maitlo, seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No.24/2021, registered at Police Station Ahmedpur, under sections 337-T, 337-A(i), 337-L(ii), 147, 148 and 504 PPC. His earlier bail application was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Khairpur, vide orders dated 04.08.2021.

2.           The allegation against the applicant is that he caused hatchet blow to the complainant on his index finger of right hand.

3.           Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that there is delay of about one month and four days in lodging of FIR, which has not been properly explained by the complainant. He next contended that the applicant has falsely been involved by the complainant due to enmity over landed property. He also contended that initially the I.O recommended the case to be disposed of under ‘B’ class but the learned Magistrate disagreeing with the I.O took cognizance of the offence. He further contended that all the sections applied in this case are bailable and do not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Lastly he prayed that the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants may be confirmed.

4.           Mr. Manzoor Hussain Mahessar Advocate filed vakalatnama  on behalf of complainant. He has contended that the name of applicant has been mentioned in the FIR with specific role, therefore he is not entitled for concession of bail. He further contended that the delay was due to medical certificate as it was issued late after the incident.

5.           Learned DPG conceded for confirmation of bail on the ground that all the sections applied are bailable and does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C and there is no explanation for registration of FIR with delay.

 

6.           I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record with their able assistance.

 

7.           Admittedly there is inordinate delay in registration of FIR. Record reflects that  the alleged incident took place on 24.02.2021 and final medical certificate was issued on 25.02.2021 but inspite of that  FIR was registered on 20.03.2021 as such the explanation furnished by the complainant is not satisfactory. Further punishment for sections 337-A(i), 337-L(ii) and 504, PPC is up to two years and are bailable while punishment of section 337-T, PPC, is only payment of arsh. It is settled principle of law that bail applications are to be decided tentatively and deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible.

 

8.           From the tentative assessment of the material available on record, the applicant has made out the case for confirmation of        pre-arrest bail, therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant / accused  by this court vide order dated 04.08.2021, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

9.           Observations made herein above are tentative in nature and will not cause any prejudice to either party at the trial.

 

 

                                                                             JUDGE

 

Suleman Khan/PA