ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr. B. A. No.872 of 2022

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(s)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before:

Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah

05.07.2022

Mr. Akhlaq Ahmed Baloch, advocate for applicants Muhammad Jamal, Ayan Afzal Ali Muhammad and Nasir, who are present on interim pre-arrest bail

Ms. Rubina Qadir, D.P.G.

Mr. Aamir Jamil, advocate the complainant
-------------------------------------------

It is alleged that the applicants in furtherance of their common intention by making trespass into house of complainant Mst. Nooreen Israr committed mischief and criminal intimidation, for that the present case was registered. On having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned II Additional Sessions Judge Karachi East they have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant criminal bail application under section 498-A, Cr. PC.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant being their neighbor, on account of some personal dispute; the offence alleged against them does not fall within the prohibitory clause and case has finally been challaned, therefore, they are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants by contending that they have committed the offence against an innocent lady only to cover up their wrongdoings in the neighbourhood.

Heard argument. Perused record.

All the penal sections applied in FIR are bailable except one under Section 452, PPC which is not falling within prohibitory clause. There is general allegation of the incident. The case has finally been challaned. The applicants have joined the trial and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of interim pre-arrest bail on their part. In these circumstances, the case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants on the point of further inquiry and malafide obviously is made out.

In view of above, interim pre-arrest already granted to the applicants is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E