ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S-557 of 2022

(Azam Ali Gopang Vs. The State)

For hearing of Bail Application.

06-03-2023.

Mr. Syed Imtiaz Hussain Shah, advocate for applicant.

Complainant Muhammad Mithal in person.

Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, Deputy P.G for the State

>>>>>…<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J;- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object committed murder of Bakhat Ali by causing him fire shot injuries, for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant on having been refused bail by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Khairpur, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Bail Application u/s 497 Cr.P.C.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about 01 day, yet it does not contain the name of the applicant, who was involved in commission of the incident on the basis of further statement; therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry.

4. The complainant has opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that he is involved in the commission of incident, however learned DPG for the State has recorded no objection for release of the applicant on bail by contending that no specific role in commission of incident is attributed to him.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with the delay of about 01 day, yet it does not contain the name and description of the applicant, those were disclosed by the complainant by way of further statement and PWs Muhammad Ismail and Ahmed Ali by way of their 161 Cr.P.C statements. The further statement could hardly be treated as part of FIR. Even otherwise, the role attributed to the applicant in commission of incident is only to the extent that he by pointing his pistol, kept the complainant party under wrongful restraint. Parties are disputed over matrimonial affairs, therefore, vicarious liability on the part of applicant, if any, would call for its determination at trial. The case has finally been challaned and there is no apprehension of tempering with the evidence on the part of the applicant. In these circumstances; a case for release of the applicant on bail, on point of further inquiry, is made out.

7. In view of above the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in sum of Rs.200,000/- (Two lacs) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

8. The instant Crl. Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

Judge

Nasim/P.A