ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Misc. Appln. No. S- 11 of 2023.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

16.01.2023.

1.          For orders on M.A. No. 161/2023 (Urgency Application).

2.         For orders on M.A. No. 162/2023 (Stay Application).

3.         For hearing of main case.

Applicant is called absent.

~~~~~~~

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through captioned criminal miscellaneous application, applicant/ complainant Mukhtiar Ali Chandio seeks cancellation of post-arrest bail granted to accused/ respondent Fazalullah Chandio by learned IV-Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, in Crime No.12/2022, registered with P.S  Baqapur (District Larkana), for offence punishable under Sections 365-B & 34 P.P.C, vide order dated 05.01.2023.

            2.         Briefly, the case of prosecution is that 09.4.2022 applicant/ complainant  Mukhtiar Ali Chandio reported the matter to police with regard to abduction of his daughter Mst. Saima by accused Abdul Sameer and others.

            3.         It appears that, after registration of the F.I.R, the accused/ respondent No.1 was arrested and sent with challan to face the charges. Ultimately, he filed an application under Section 497 Cr.P.C. for his release on bail, which was allowed and he was granted post arrest bail vide order impugned in these proceedings, which has been challenged by complainant before this Court by moving instant criminal miscellaneous application.

            4.         The applicant/ complainant is called absent and no any intimation is furnished on his behalf.

            5.         Perusal of the impugned Order reflects that the accused/ respondent No.1 was admitted to post-arrest bail on the grounds that, F.I.R is delayed for six days and no explanation was furnished; alleged abdcutee with her own freewill contracted marriage with Samiullah and copy of her freewill affidavit was placed on record before the learned trial Court and alleged abductee also filed Constt. Petition No. S- No.1780/2022, wherein she also denied the allegation of abduction.

            6.         It is well-settled law that provisions of sub-Section (5) of Section 497, Cr.P.C are not punitive in nature and there is no compulsion for cancelling the bail unless the bail granting order is patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect or without jurisdiction having been passed without observing mandatory provision of law. Moreover, unless strong and exceptional grounds, such as, abuse/ misuse of concession of bail exit, this Court would not interfere with the order of granting bail.

            7.          On careful scrutiny of the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, it appears to be justified and well-reasoned and not need to be interfered by this Court. Accordingly, in view of above, the present application being devoid of merits is here by dismissed in limine along with pending applications.

                                                Judge

Ansari