ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 544 of 2022.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

21.11.2022.

1.         For orders on office objections.

2.         For hearing of bail application.

            Mr. Muhammad Sharif Ghanghro, Advocate for applicant.

            Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

~~~~~~~

Amjad Ali Sahito, J: Through this application, applicant Bhooral son of Luddan Lolai has sought for his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.05/2022, registered at Police Station Ratodero (District Larkana), for offences punishable under Sections 324, 114 and 34 P.P.C.

            The allegation against present applicant as per F.I.R lodged by complainant Ameer Bux Lolai on 28.10.2022 is that, he came at place of incident in company of co-accused persons and instigated rest of his co-accused for firing upon PW Deedar and on his instigation co-accused Anwar and Jinsar are alleged to have fired pistol shots at Deedar, the son of complainant. The motive for the incident, as set-out in the F.I.R, is previous matrimonial enmity between the parties.

            Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that, F.I.R is delayed for more than a day; that no any active role of causing any injury etc. is assigned to applicant except his presence being armed with pistol and has been assigned role of only instigation, though he was allegedly armed with pistol but he has not used the same in commission of alleged offence. Per learned counsel, in these circumstances, the question of sharing common intention vicarious liability of present applicant with principal co-accused would be determined at the time of trial.

            Conversely, learned D.P.G. appearing for the State opposed grant of bail to the applicant on the grounds that the applicant has been nominated in the F.I.R with his name and parentage and that he had facilitated the principal co-accused, who fired at PW Deedar, as such he is vicariously liable for  murderous assault upon witness.

No doubt, the applicant has been nominated in the F.I.R, but no any active or specific role of causing any injury to any of member of complainant party is assigned to him; though he was armed with pistol, but he is not alleged to have used the same in the commission of offence. The applicant has acted as instigator only and his mere presence has been shown in the F.I.R. The co-accused Anwar and Jinsar are alleged to have fired pistol shots at Deedar and injured him. As such, question of common intention and vicarious liability of the present applicant with main accused would be determined at trial. The case has been challaned and custody of the applicant is no more required to police for the purpose of investigation. Reliance is placed in the case of Qurban Ali v. The State reported in 2017 SCMR 279 and Mumtaz Hussain and 5 others v. The State (1996 SCMR 1125).

            A tentative assessment of all the above factors makes the case of applicant one of further enquiry in terms of subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands allowed. Applicant Bhooral Lolai is admitted to bail upon his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand rupees) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

            Before parting with this order, it is made clear that, observations made herein above are tentative in nature and would not prejudice case of either party at trial.

                                                                JUDGE

Ansari/*