ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 73 of 2023.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

24.03.2023.

1.         For orders on office objections.

2.         For hearing of bail application.

            Mr. Ajmair Ali Bhutto, Advocate for applicant. 

            Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.

~~~~~~~

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through this application, applicant Hidayatullah Samejo has sought for his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.155/2022 registered at Police Station Kashmore, for offences punishable under Sections 324, 337-A (i), 337-A (ii), 337-F (i), 504, 148 and 149 P.P.C.  His similar request was turned down by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kashmore, vide his Order dated 11.02.2023.

            The facts of case of prosecution are mentioned in F.I.R (copy of which along with its English translation) is available on record; as such there is no need to reproduce the facts herein again.

            Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that, the applicant is innocent and he has been implicated in this case by complainant with malafide intention and ulterior motives; that F.I.R is delayed for about one day, which has not been explained by the complainant; that there is inconsistency between ocular and medical evidence, therefore, the case of applicant requires further enquiry entitling him for concession of bail. In support of his contentions learned counsel has placed his reliance upon cases reported as 2020 P.Cr.L.J Note 166 and 2020 MLD 1841.

            Conversely, learned D.P.G. opposed the grant of bail on the grounds that applicant is nominated in F.I.R with specific role of causing injury to PW Sher Muhammad with intention to commit his murder, which hit him, as such ingredients of Section 324 P.P.C are fully attracted in the case and the offence falls within prohibition as contained in Section 497 Cr.P.C; and that during the incident the complainant and other P.Ws also received injuries at the hands of co-accused; that one empty cartridge was produced by complainant before police and that medical evidence as well as 161 Cr.P.C statements of P.Ws fully supports the case of complainant, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

            Heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the material available on record.

            It reflects from the record that applicant has been nominated in the F.I.R with specific role of causing firearm injury with gun to PW Sher Muhammad hitting on his shank of his right leg. A murderous assault as defined in Section 324 P.P.C draws no anatomical distinction between vital or non-vital parts of human body; once the trigger is pressed and the victim is effectively targeted, “intention or knowledge” as contemplated by the Section 324 P.P.C is manifested; the course of a bullet is not controlled or steered by assailant’s choice nor can he claim, any premium for a poor marksmanship.  This brings the case of applicant prima-facie within the spirit of Section 324 of the P.P.C, hit by statutory prohibition. Moreover, injury assigned to applicant finds support from medical certificate and there is also recovery of empty cartridge from place of vardat. The version of complainant also gets support from 161 Cr.P.C statements of prosecution witnesses.

            The case law relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant is on different footing, and is not helpful to the applicant, as it varies from case to case depending upon the facts of each case. 

            Tentatively, all these factors connect the applicant with commission of alleged offence disentitling him for concession of discretionary relief of bail. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands dismissed.

                                                       Judge

Ansari