ORDER SHEET

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

 

Criminal Bail Appln. No. S-28 of 2023

 

Criminal Bail Appln. No. S-34 of 2023

 

 

 

Applicants

 

i). Ali Muhammad Soomro

(In Cr. Bail. Appln. No.S-28/2023)

 

ii).  Hafiz Ghulam Hussain

Through Mr. Muhammad Ali Pirzada, advocate

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Rajib Ali Soomro

(In Cr. Bail. Appln. No. S-34/2023)

 

Through Mr. Razi Khan Nabi Bux R. Chandio, advocate

 

The State

 

Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General

 

 

Date of hearing:                  16-02-2023

Date of order:                      16-02-2023

 

 

ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J.- Through these two criminal bail applications, the applicants/accused Ali Muhammad, Hafiz Ghulam Hussain and Rajib Ali Soomro seek confirmation of interim pre-arrest-bail in Crime No.84/2022, registered at Police Station Warah for the offence U/S 336-A, 336-B, 34 P.P.C, after rejection of their bail plea by the learned Sessions Judge, Kambar-Shahdadkot @ Kambar vide order dated 10.01.2023.

2.                         The facts of the incident are mentioned in the memo of 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.                         It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants/accused are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case; that the victim has not lodged the F.I.R, however, the same has been lodged by one A.S.I. Muhammad Jurial Chandio of P.S. Warrah on behalf of the State after delay of two days and same has not been explained properly; that victim and other eyewitnesses mentioned in the F.I.R are not supporting the case of prosecution and have filed their affidavits before the trial court including this court. They next contended that the victim has not been examined medically and there is no medical evidence to support the version of complainant. They, therefore, request for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused.

4.                         Learned D.P.G. has opposed the grant of bail on the basis that offence for which the applicants are involved carries punishment upto ten years and same falls within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C.

5.                         Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned D.P.G for the State, perused the material available on record with their able assistance.

6.                         Admittedly there is delay of two days in registration of F.I.R and the explanation furnished in the F.I.R is not satisfactory. In the present case, prosecution witnesses are not supporting the case and the injured victim has not been medically examined though the reason for his non-examination was inquired from the investigation officer, he submits that he has not appeared before the doctor and he admitted that he has not taken any efforts to bring the injured before the doctor for examination. I.O has also failed to give any reason for non-examination. It further reflects that A.S.I Muhammad Jurial  Chandio is complainant of the case and author of FIR and he authorized himself to be as investigation officer and conducted the investigation in malafide manner. All these factors make the case of applicants one of further inquiry entitling them for confirmation of their interim pre-arrest bail in view of subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, both criminal bail applications are allowed. Interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused vide orders dated 24.01.2023, 27.01.2023 is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

7.                         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

 

Abdul Salam/P.A