THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-632 of 2022

Applicant:            Imran alias Babal through Mr. Muhammad Ali Memon, Advocate.

Respondent:        The State

Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing:  06.02.2023

Date of Order:     06.02.2023

O R D E R

ZULFIQUAR ALI SANGI, J.- Through instant Criminal Bail Application, applicant/accused Imran alias Babal son of Ranjhan Sanjrani seeks post arrest bail in Crime No. 64/2022, offence under Sections 302, 120-B & 34 PPC of the Police Station Stuart Gang. Prior to this, he filed such application, but the same was dismissed by the Court of 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur vide order dated 15.11.2022; hence he filed instant Criminal Bail Application.

2.                The facts of the case are mentioned in the bail application and the copy of F.I.R. is also attached with the bail application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same here.

3.                Learned counsel submits that there is delay of two days in lodgment of the F.I.R. and the recovery of the dead body; however, there is no date and time of the alleged incident of murder. He next contends that the complainant is a police official, who on his own has registered the F.I.R and no role has been assigned against the applicant/accused, therefore, matter requires further enquiry. Lastly, learned counsel prayed for grant of bail to the applicant/accused.

4.                Learned Deputy Prosecutor General has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that there is sufficient material available on record to connect the applicant/accused with the commission of offence; there is no malafide on the part of the police to involve the applicant and since no legal heir of the deceased has come forward to register the F.I.R., therefore, police official, having no alternate, has registered the F.I.R. on behalf of the State. Lastly he prayed that bail application may be dismissed.

5.                Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record with their able assistance.

6.                Admittedly, there is delay of two days in lodgment of the F.I.R. from the date of recovery of the dead body.  From the perusal of contents of the F.I.R. it reflects that the incident of murder is unseen, no one knows that murder was committed even on the day of recovery of dead body no F.I.R. was registered and there is no evidence that who informed the complainant that present applicant is involved in the incident.  It is the trial Court to see as to whether the applicant has committed the offence or not after recording pro and contra evidence of the parties and at bail stage only tentative assessment is to be made.   

7.                Record reflects that the case has been challaned and the applicant is behind the bar since his arrest without any progress in the trial. In these circumstances, the applicant/accused has made out case for grant of bail under sub-section (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C.  Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant/accused is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Hundred Thousands only) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

8.                Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of either party at trial.

                                J U D G E

Manzoor