ORDER-SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA
Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 06 of 2023.
|
Date of hearing |
Order with signature of Judge |
06.02.2023.
1. For orders on office objections.
2. For hearing of bail application.
Mr. Zafar Ali Malghani, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.
~~~~~~~
Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J-. Applicant Sheenh alias Shaheen Khan Seelro has sought for his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.19/2021, registered at P.S Jahan Wah (District Shikarpur), for offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B and 34 P.P.C. His similar request was turned down by learned Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, vide Order dated 21.06.2022.
2. The case of prosecution is that on 20.8.2021 applicant/ accused and co-accused Jalal came to complainant party and deceased Abdul Fattah, the brohter of complainant accompanied them on motorcycle to village Sheranpur and did not return home and on enquiry the accused persons disclosed that Abdul Fattah had left them at village Sheranpur. The complainant party kept-on searching Abdul Fattah but could not get any clue; however on 27.9.2021 the complainant was informed by his relative Ali Hyder about presence of dead body in bushes at bank of Khirthar canal, which was identified to be dead body of Abdul Fattah. Ultimately, the complainant lodged F.I.R.
3. Learned counsel for applicant mainly contended that, the F.I.R is registered with inordinate delay and no plausible explanation is furnished; that the incident of murder is un-seen and un-witnessed one and there is no direct or indirect evidence against applicant except only last seen evidence, which is very weak type of evidence and cannot be relied upon; that the crime weapon has been foisted upon applicant and that the applicant has been in the jail since 09.10.2021 without any progress in the trial of the case. He further added that since challan has been filed and custody of applicant is no more required to police for the purpose of investigation. Lastly, he prayed for grant of bail in favor of the applicant.
4. The complainant has appeared in person and has expressed his full confidence over learned Add. P.G.
5. Learned Add. P.G. opposed grant of bail to applicant on the grounds that he has been nominated in F.I.R with allegation that he and co-accused took deceased and they were lastly seen with the deceased; that crime weapon has been recovered from applicant and empties recovered from place of incident were matched with the pistol recovered from applicant as per FSL report.
6. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Addl. P.G. appearing for the State and perused the material available on record.
7. It appears that the alleged incident of accompanying deceased with accused persons took place on 20.08.2021; his dead body was found on 27.09.2021, while F.I.R was registered on 29.09.2022. There is nothing on record to show that since 20.08.2021 to 27.09.2021 the complainant party had made any complaint to any authority including police with regard to missing and or abduction of deceased, and even after the recovery of dead body the matter was reported to police with delay of two days. Furthermore, there appears no direct evidence against applicant except only last seen evidence, which is weak type of evidence. The recovery of crime weapon cannot be considered as direct evidence, but it would only be considered as circumstantial evidence. All these circumstances make the case against applicant one of further enquiry as envisaged under Subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C.
8. Moreover, the applicant is stated to be behind Bars since 06.10.2021 and trial of the case is not yet commenced. 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 and in these circumstances continued custody of the applicant in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this juncture. It is also well settled law that bail does not mean acquittal of accused but only change of custody from government agencies to the sureties, who on furnishing bonds take responsibility to produce the accused, whenever and wherever required to be produced.
9. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands allowed. Consequently, applicant Sheenh alias Shaheen Khan Seelro is granted bail upon his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.300,000/- (Three hundred thousand rupees) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
10. 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.
Judge
Ansari