ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 79 of 2021.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

08.09.2021.

            Mr. Faiz Muhammad Larik, Advocate for applicant.

            Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chandio, Advocate for the complainant.

            Mr. Muhammad Imran Abbasi, Assistant Attorney General.

~~~~~~~

Abdul Mobeen Lakho, J: Applicant Abdul Sattar son of Alif Khan Sarki seeks his admission to pre-arrest bail in Crime No.164/2020 of P.S A-Section Thull (District Jacobabad), registered for offences punishable under Sections 15, 17, 2 (5), 24 of Gas Theft (Control and recovery) Act, 2016 and Section 462 (c) P.P.C. His, similar request was declined vide order dated 20.10.2021 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jacobabad in Crl. Bail Appln. No. 912 of 2020.

            In a nutshell, the case of prosecution is that on 29.9.2020 complainant Fazal Muhammad Baloch Deputy Manager (F.I.R Cell) of SSGC Larkana lodged report with P.S A-Section Thull, stating therein that on 29.9.2020 he alongwith Gulzar Ahmed Ghunio CGTO SSGC Deputy manager Jacobabad and Muhammad Murtaza Mirani Deputy Manager Thull SSGC Office Thull including technical team started checking for illegal connections in Thull town and when at about 03.00 p.m. they reached main Bazar Thull, they saw accused Abdul Sattar (present applicant) committing theft from main line through rubber pipe operating generator of 24-KV 16 Valve to supply electricity in market. The complainant through technical team removed rubber pipes; brought recovered property at Police-station and lodged F.I.R to the above effect

            Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that, except SSGC officials no independent person from spot has been cited as witness; that the alleged incident is un-witnessed and un-seen, as none had seen the accused while installing the pipe in the main line of SSGC; that the applicant is not owner of the building wherefrom the alleged pipes and other material gas theft  is alleged to have been recovered; that as per contents of F.I.R the alleged incident has taken place in broad day light in Market of Thull town, where so many shops are available and people all along available whole the day time, but no independent person has been associated as witnesses of alleged incident; that since there is low pressure in supply of gas to Thull town and domestic consumers of Thull town are facing severe difficulties, their lives have become miserable, therefore, the applicant about a month prior to registration of this case alongwith other people of Muhalla went to SSGC office Thull and protested peacefully against SSGC officials for non-supply of gas, which had annoyed complainant party/ officials of SSGC, as such they have managed instant false case and involved applicant in this false case; that in view of these circumstances the case of prosecution is doubtful, and calls for further enquiry in terms of Section 497 (2) Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further added that the case stands challaned and applicant has joined the trial and regularly attending the trial Court. He lastly prayed for confirmation of interim pre arrest bail already granted to applicant.

            Conversely, learned counsel for complainant-company opposed grant of bail to applicant-accused.

            Heard both learned counsel and gone through the material available on record. On a tentative assessment of the matter, I have come to the conclusion that the applicant has been successful in making out a case of further inquiry on the grounds that:

(a)       The applicant was neither owner of the property where the generator was allegedly installed nor he was resident of the area.

(b)       The prosecution did not even inquired as to whose property it was where the generator was installed.

(c)       The prosecution did not arrest the applicant when they went for inspection of the area and disconnected the illegal gas connection to the generator producing the electricity supply to the local market. 

(d)       None from the market was investigated to reveal such fact and no statement was recorded of any person which narrate utilizing electricity produced by illegal connection of gas supply.

(e)       The defence plea taken by learned counsel for applicant has got some weight that since the applicant-accused alongwith other people of Muhalla went to SSGC office Thull and protested against SSGC officials for non-supply of gas, it had annoyed officials of SSGC; therefore, they have managed this case.

Furthermore, the case stands challaned and applicant has joined the trial and regularly attending the trial Court and no purpose would be served if the applicant is refused bail and put behind bars.

            For the foregoing reasons the captioned bail application is allowed. Consequently, interim pre arrest bail already granted to applicant Abdul Sattar Sarki vide Order dated 22.02.2021, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

            Before parting with the order, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not prejudice case of either party at trial.

                                                Judge

Ansari