IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR
Crl.
Bail Application No.S-14 of 2022.
|
Date of hearing |
Order with signature of Judge |
For
hearing of Bail Application.
O R D E R.
07-02.2022.
Mr. Abdul RaufHullio,
Advocate for applicant/accused.
Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional
P.G for the State.
-.-.-.-
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- Through the instant bail application,
applicant/accused Jinsar Ali son of ShahzadoUjjanseeks post arrest bail in crime
No. 116/2021, offence under sections 302, 311 PPC registered at police stationTandoMasti
Khan, District KharipurMir’s. Prior to this, applicant/accused filed such bail application
before the Court of learned Additional Sessions JudgeKhairpur, who has
dismissed the same vide order dated 22-12-2021 and the said order has been
assailed before this Court.
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. It is, inter-alia, contended by the
learned counsel for the applicant/accused that applicant/accusedis innocent and
hasfalsely been implicated in this case; that all the P.Ws are police officials
working at one and same police station; that the story set up in the FIR appears
to be managed and the same is not reliable; that no private person has been
cited as witness or mashir and the applicant /accused has been falsely booked
on the statement of SabirHussain brother of deceased, otherwise there is no
direct evidence against him as such the applicant/accused is entitled for
concession of bail
4.
On the other, learnedAdditionalP.G for the State has vehemently opposed for grant
of bail on the ground thatname of applicant transpires in the FIR and the crime
weapon i.e blood stained hatchet has been recovered from the accused. The applicant/accused
does not deserve the concession of bail in the murder case which carries
capital punishment falling under prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C as
such 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 the record with their
assistance.
6.
From perusal of record it reflects
that name of applicant/accused very much transpires in the FIR with sole
allegation that he has committed the murder of his wife Mst. Kounj by
means of hatchet blows. It reveals from the record that on 09.11.2021 at 0500
hours on spy information police party of Police Station TandoMasti khan headed
by HC Muhammad AcharNarejo went and reached at the place of incident where saw
dead body of a lady lying where one male person disclosed his name to be
SabirHussain being brother of deceased disclosed
that accused Jinsar has killed his sister on the allegation of KARAP by causing
hatchet blows. The police examined the dead body of deceased with the help of
ladies present there and prepared such mashirnama, brought dead body at
Hospital and after post mortem came at Police Station and lodged FIR.PW Sabir
has supported the case of prosecution and corroborated the version of
complainant. The blood stained earth and blood stand clothes corroborated the
ocular testimony. The crime weapon i.e blood stained hatchet has been recovered
from the possession of applicant/accused. There appear reasonable grounds to
believe that the applicant/accused has committed the alleged offence.During
investigation, the Investigating Officer has recorded 161 Cr.P.C statements of
PWs, who have fully supported the version of the complainant.Learned counsel
for the applicant has failed to point out any ill will or malafide on the part
of complainant to falsely involve the applicant/accused in the commission of
offence. It is well settled principle of law that at the bail stage only tentative
assessment is to be made. It seems that the applicant/accused is involved in
the heinous offence and his case scarily flaws within the prohibitory clause of
section 497 Cr.P.C.
7.
In view of above
discussion, learned counsel for the applicant/accused has failed to make out a
good case for grant of bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC,
therefore, the applicant/accused is not entitled for concession of bail and
same is dismissed accordingly.
8.
Needless, to mention that the observations
made herein above are tentative in nature and would not prejudice the case of
either party at trial.
Judge
Irfan/P.A