ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S-256 of 2022

(Barkat Ali Lakho & another Vs. The State)

1. For Orders on office objection.

2. For hearing of Post Arrest Bail Application.

17-02-2023.

Mr. Achar Khan Gabole advocate for applicants.

Complainant Mumtaz Ali in person.

Mr. Syed Sardar Ali Shah Rizvi, Additional P.G for the State.

>>>>>…<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J;- It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, committed murder of Shakeel Ali by causing him fire shot injuries and then went away by insulting the complainant and making aerial firing to create harassment, for that they were booked and reported upon.

2. On having been refused bail by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Naushahro Feroze, the applicants have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Bail Application under section 497 Cr.P.C.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party in order to satisfy its enmity with them and even otherwise no effective role in commission of incident is attributed to them. By contending so, he has sought for release of the applicants on bail on point of further enquiry. In support of his contention he relied upon the case of Muhammad Irfan Vs. The State & Ors (2014 SCMR 1347)

4. Learned APG for the State who is assisted by complainant Mumtaz Ali has opposed to release of the applicants on bail by contending that the case is scheduled for recording evidence of the complainant party.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The role attributed to the applicants in commission of incident is only to the extent that either they abused the complainant party or made aerial firing to create harassment; parties are already disputed, therefore, vicarious liability on the part of applicants, if any, would be determined at trial; the case has finally been challaned and there is no apprehension of tempering with the evidence on the part of the applicants. In these circumstance; a case for release of the applicants on bail, on point of further inquiry obviously is made out.

7. In view of above the applicants are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in sum of Rs.200,000/- (Two lac) each and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

8. The instant Crl. Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

Judge

Nasim/P.A