ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S-  245 of 2022.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

03.08.2022.

1.         For orders on office objections.

2.         For hearing of bail application.

            Mr. Ahmed Bux Abro, Advocate for applicant.

            Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

~~~~~~~

Abdul Mobeen Lakho, J: Through this application, applicant Ghulam Yaseen son of Niaz Muhammad Sabzoi has sought for his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.52/2022, registered at Police Station  A-Section Kandhkot (District Kashmore @ Kandhkot), for offences punishable under Section 324, 337-D, 147, 148, 149 P.P.C.

            The allegation against applicant/ accused as per F.I.R lodged by complainant Manzoor Ali is that on 03.08.2020 he along with co-accused entered into house of the complainant duly armed with weapons and applicant is alleged to have made straight fire from gun at P.W Adam Hussain, the son of complainant, which hit him. The motive for the alleged incident as set out in the F.I.R is previous enmity between the parties over landed properties. 

            Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that, the applicant has been implicated in this case due to previous enmity between the parties; that there is inordinate and scandalous delay of about nineteen months in registration of the F.I.R, which is fatal to the prosecution as to its veracity and genuineness; that there is no repetition of fire by the applicant, as such application of Section 324 P.P.C would be determined at the time of trial; that there is no any recovery of incriminating article from possession of applicant which may connect him with commission of alleged offence, though he remained in police custody remand for many days. Learned counsel further contended that the applicant has been in the jail for more than five months and case has been challaned, as such custody of applicant is not required by police.

            Learned D.P.G appearing for the State opposed the grant of bail to applicant/ accused on the grounds that, the delay in registration of the F.I.R has been fully explained by the complainant; that the applicant has been nominated in the F.I.R with specific role of making fire upon PW Adab Hussain and such injury falls within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. 

            It appears that the alleged incident had taken place on 03.08.2020 and F.I.R was registered on 16.03.2022, with delay of about nineteen (19) months. Such inordinate and scandalous delay in reporting the matter to police is fatal to the prosecution and this sole fact makes the entire case of prosecution as doubtful. It is well settled law that, the delay in reporting the matter to police is being usually caused due to factors i.e. deliberation, negotiation, discussion, therefore, it is falling within the ambit of deliberation and afterthought, as such it is always considered to be fatal for the prosecution making the case of accused one of further enquiry. In addition to the above, there existed previous ill-will, grudge and enmity between the parties over landed property, which has been admitted by complainant himself in the F.I.R. As such, the case against applicant in view of these two circumstances, i.e. previous enmity between the parties and the inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R requires further probe. It further appears that, there is no repetition of the fire by applicant; therefore, application of Section 324 P.P.C would be determined at the time of trial. Besides above, as per challan-sheet that there is no recovery of incriminating article from possession of applicant which may connect him with commission of alleged offence. The applicant has been in the jail since more than five months; the investigation of this case has been finalized, and physical custody of the applicant is no more required to police for the purpose of investigation. In these circumstances continued custody of the applicant in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this juncture.

           A tentative assessment of all the above factors makes the case of applicant as one of further enquiry in terms of subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C., entitling  the applicant to concession of bail. Accordingly, applicant  Ghulam Yaseen is granted bail upon his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (One hundred thousand rupees) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

            Before parting with this order, it needs not to make clarification that the observations recorded hereinabove are tentative in nature, therefore, the trial Court shall not be influenced in any manner whatsoever while deciding the case.

                                                Judge

Ansari