IN THE HIGH
COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Bail
Application No.S-755 of 2021.
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Applicants: Applicants/accused
are called absent.
Through: Mr.Alam
Sher Bozdar, Advocate.
The
State: Through
Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional Prosecutor General along with Inspector
Imamuddin SHO Police Station Ghotki.
Date of hearing. 13.01.2022.
Date of decision. 13.01.2022.
O
R D E R.
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
AMJAD Ali SAHITO, J.- Through the instant Crl. Bail Application, applicants/accused
named above seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 317/2021, offence u/s 452, 365-B,
364, 506/2 PPC registered at police Station ‘A’ Section Ghotki. Prior to this
applicants/accused filed pre arrest bail application, which was dismissed by
learned I-Additional Sessions Judge (MCTC) Ghotki vide order dated 24-11-2021,
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 applicants/accused
contends that applicants/accused are innocent and have falsely been implicated
in this case due to enmity with the complainant. He further contended that the
FIR is delayed for about 12 days, no plausible explanation has been furnished;
that no any injury has been attributed to any of the applicants/accused to
believe that they have committed the alleged offence. He further contended that
after recovery of the alleged detenue she has not deposed against the
applicants/accused nor any injury received by her on the body at the hands of
applicants/accused, therefore case of the applicants/accused require further
inquiry and he prays for confirmation of interim pre arrest bail.
4. On
the other hand, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned Additional
P.G vehemently opposed for grant of bail and submit that the stamp vendor has
given affidavit stating that neither the complainant appeared before him nor
obtained any stamp paper form him, infact Syed Hassan Shah (Applicant/accused
No.1) has taken stamp paper from him on the pretext that they will write the faisla
on the said stamp paper. Lastly prayed that applicants/accused are very much
involved in the commission of offence and they are 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
the names of applicants/accused transpire in the FIR with specific role that on the date of incident all accused
persons with common intention duly armed with deadly weapons entered into the
house of complainant and forcibly abducted Mst. Tasleem and Mst. Hidayat
Khatoon and detained them at unknown place. During course of investigation
police has recovered Mst. Tasleem from the possession of accused persons
as such her statement was recorded in which she has supported the version of
complainant and implicated the applicants/ accused in the commission of
offence. The delay of lodgment of FIR has been plausibly explained by the
complainant that after the incident he approached to Police Station for
registration but police has refused to register his FIR as such he has filed an
application under section 22-A, B Cr.P.C, same was allowed and thereafter he
has lodged the FIR without any delay. 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 applicants/accused to connect
them 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
applicants/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 25.11.2021 earlier granted to the applicants/accused is hereby recalled.
8. Alleged detenue Mst. Tasleem after her
recovery has been brought before this Court by the concerned SHO and states
that she wants to go along with her father. She is allowed to go and reside
with her father.
9. 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 applicants on merits.
Judge
Irfan/P.A