IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No. S- 174 of 2022.

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

 

Applicant:                  Aaqib Ali son of Abdul Jabbar, Shaikh,

Through Mr. Habibullah Chandio Advocate.

 

Complainant:                Ghulam Sarwar Rajput through Mr. Muhammad Qayoom Arain, Advocate.

 

 

The State:                 Through Mr. Khalil Ahmed Maitlo D.P.G.

 

Date of hearing.        20.05.2022.

Date of decision.       20.05.2022.

 

                                O R D E R.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

 

AMJAD Ali SAHITO,J.- Through the instant Crl. Bail Application, applicant/accused named above seeks pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 17/2022, offence u/s 337-F(iii), 147, 148, 149, 114, 504 PPC registered at Police Station Mithiani District Naushehro Feroze. Prior to this applicant/accused filed pre arrest bail application, which was dismissed by learned Sessions Judge Naushehro Feroze vide order dated 25.04.2022, hence he filed the instant Bail Application.

 

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

3.      Learned counsel for the applicant/accused contends that applicant/accused is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant due to previous enmity. In support of his contention he filed statement along with certain documents which is taken on record. He further contended that the injury which is attributed against the applicant/accused does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C as such applicant/accused is entitled for pre-arrest bail. He has also added that the case has been challaned as such applicant/accused is no more required for further investigation. Lastly prayed for confirmation of interim pre arrest bail.

 

4.      On the other hand, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned D.P.G vehemently opposed for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail and submits that the name of applicant/accused transpires in the FIR  with specific allegation that he caused hatchet blow to Ali Nawaz son of complainant on his lower part of leg. He further added that if according to learned counsel for applicant/accused that the injury so alleged is false and managed then why the same has not been challenged. Lastly prayed that applicant/accused is very much involved in the commission of offence and he is not entitled for concession of bail.

 

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

 

6.      From the perusal of record, it appears that name of applicant/accused is appearing in the FIR with specific role that he gave hatchet blow to Ali Nawaz son of complainant on his lower part of right leg, resultantly he was injured and was shifted to hospital for medical treatment and as per opinion of the doctor the injury attributed against present applicant/accused was declared as Ghair Jaifah Mutalliha under section 337-F(iii) PPC. At bail stage only tentative assessment is to be made and nothing has been brought on record to show any ill-will or malafide on the part of the complainant, which is requirement for grant of pre-arrest bail. All the P.Ws have supported the version of complainant as such sufficient material is available on the record against the applicant/accused to connect him with the alleged offences. In this regard, I am fortified with the case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan [2019 S C M R 1129] wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held as under:-

 

          ''Grant of pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary remedy in criminal jurisdiction; it is diversion of usual course of law, arrest in cognizable cases; a protection to the innocent being hounded on trump up charges through abuse of process of law, therefore a petitioner seeking judicial protection is required to reasonably demonstrate that intended arrest is calculated to humiliate him with taints of mala fide; it is not a substitute for post arrest bail in every run of the mill  criminal case as it seriously hampers the course of investigation----the principles of judicial protection are being faithfully adhered to till date, therefore, grant of pre-arrest bail essentially requires considerations of malafide, ulterior motive or abuse of process of law."

 

7.      In view of above, learned counsel for the applicant/accused failed to make out a good case for grant of pre-arrest bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC. In such circumstances, the instant Crl. bail Application stands dismissed and interim order dated 26.04.2022 earlier granted to the applicant/accused is hereby recalled.

 

 

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

                                                                                                                                                                      Judge              

Irfan/P.A