IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No.S-613 of 2021

Crl. Bail Application No.S-746 of 2021

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

1. For Orders on office objection.

2. For hearing of bail application.

O R D E R.

27-01-2022.

M/s Syed Murad Ali Shah and Khan Muhammad Sangi, advocate for the applicants.

Mr. Pervaiz Ali Maitlo, advocate for complainant.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, APG for the State.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., By this single order I indent to dispose of above mentioned Crl. Bail Applications. Through Crl. Bail Application No.613/2021, applicants/accused Tahir Ali Mastoi and Farhan Ali Mastoi seek post arrest bail, while through Crl. Bail Application No.S-746/2021 applicants/accused Muhammad Hassan and Ali Hassan both bycaste Mastoi seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 47 of 2021, offence u/s 302, 364, 147, 148, 149 PPC registered at police Station Baberloi, District Khairpur. Prior to this, their post arrest as well as pre arrest bail applications were turned down by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC Khairpur vide order dated 15-09-2021 and 27-10-2021 respectively.

2. The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant with mala fide intentions and ulterior motives due to previous murderous enmity, which has been admitted by the complainant in the FIR; that seven real brothers and four sons have been involved in this case; that complainant has shown two different places of incident and different stories in the FIR as well as in her further statement; that both the parties are co-villagers who have entangled in previous murderous dispute; that only the independent witness in this case is/was the Taxi driver, but neither he was examined by the investigating officer during investigation nor by DSP Complaint Cell Ghulam Ali Jummai and all the remaining witnesses are relatives of the complainant as well as deceased as such false implication of the applicants/accused cannot be ruled out; that role assigned against six accused that they have thrown stones upon the face of deceased; that case has been challaned and applicants are no more required for further investigation, therefore, he pray for grant of bail to applicants/accused Tahir Ali Mastoi and Farhan Ali Mastoi and seek confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail for applicants/accused Muhammad Hassan and Ali Hassan. He relied upon case of Muhammad Younas Vs. The State (2020 MLD 1032).

4. On the other hand, learned APG for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed for the grant and confirmation of bail to the applicants/accused on the ground that they are nominated in the FIR with specific role that they duly armed with pistols and stones with their common intention and caused injuries to deceased Areez Hussain @ Adeel son of complainant and committed his murder, therefore they are not entitled for any concession.

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

6. Perusal of FIR shows that in the year 2015 Gulshan Ali Mastoi was murdered, such FIR was lodged in which Areez Hussain @ Adeel and Nazeer Hussain son and husband of the complainant respectively were nominated and in that murder case the deceased Areez Hussain @ Adeel was on bail, which shows that both the parties are already entangled with previous murderous enmity. Complainant in the FIR has further disclosed that after kidnapping the son of the complainant, they took him towards the date palm garden of Azam Larik, where accused Mahdi Hassan @ Arbelo made straight fire upon her son at his forehead and accused Gul Hassan made fire upon him which hit him on right eye and other accused caused him stones on his face and committed his murder. Perusal of medical certificate shows that out of four injuries, two injuries were caused with firearm weapon and remaining two injuries are shown as lacerated wounds caused with hard and blunt substance. The role assigned against all six accused persons is general in nature and no specific role has been assigned against them. It is yet be decided after recording of the evidence, who has caused latter both injuries or to determine, vicarious liability of accused persons. Moreover, seven real brothers and four sons have been involved in this case by the complainant. Further, learned counsels for the applicants/accused have pleaded malafide on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the applicants/accused on account of previous murderous enmity. At bail stage only tentative assessment is to be made. The case has been challaned and the applicants/accused are no more required for further inquiry.

7. In view of above discussion, learned counsel for the applicants/accused have made out a good case for grant as well as confirmation of interim pre arrest bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C, therefore, Crl. Bail Application No.S-613/2021 is allowed and applicants/accused Tahir Ali Mastoi and Farhan Ali Mastoi are granted bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (One lac) each and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. While the Crl. Bail Application No.S-746/2021 is also allowed and the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused Muhammad Hassan and Ali Hassan is confirmed on same terms and conditions. If applicants/accused misuse the concession of bail, then trial Court is at liberty to take action against them.

8. Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the Trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant on merits.

J U D G E

Nasim/P.A