ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

3^rd Crl. Bail Appln. No. S-  05 of 2023.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

17.04.2023.

            Mr. Shakeel Ahmed G. Ansari, Advocate for applicant.

            Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Additional Prosecutor General.

~~~~~~~

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J:     Through this application, applicant Azizullah son of Sardar Bux Bangulani seeks his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.30/2021, registered with Police Station Jaggan @ Hamayoon (District Shikarpur), for offences punishable under Sections 380, 511 and 459 P.P.C.

            It is worth to point out, that learned counsel has not even placed on record the copy memo of bail application filed before learned Court below and the order passed there. However, he insisted to be heard, as such, he has been heard and perused the material available on record.

            Learned counsel for the applicant pressed this bail application mainly on two grounds. Firstly, that co-accused Ali Gul and Manzoor were granted bail by this Court vide two separate Orders dated 04.11.2021 and 03.10.2022 respectively. Secondly, that applicant is in jail since 22.6.2021.

            It appears from the record that, on merits bail plea of the applicant has already been declined by this Court vide dated 04.11.2021 passed in Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 349/2021 by differentiating the role of present applicant from role of co-accused Ali Gul, who was allowed bail vide same order. So for as contention of learned counsel that co-accused Manzoor has also been granted bail by this Court is concerned, suffice it to say that case of co-accused Manzoor is also on different footings, as the injury assigned to this co-accused carries punishment upto three years, whereas injury assigned to applicant carried punishment upto five years. The second ground of learned counsel is that of hardship and delay in conclusion of trial, as according to him the applicant is in jail since 22.6.2021. It is observed that this ground has also been dealt with by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2022 passed in second bail application filed on behalf of present applicant i.e. Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 114 of 2021. It would be conducive to reproduce the relevant portion of the order, which reads as under:

            “Earlier, the applicant’s bail application had already been dismissed on merits by this Court and this is filed on the ground of hardship and in the conclusion of trial……

7.         So far the ground of hardship and / or delay in conclusion of trial and alleged non-compliance of directions of this Court for conclusion of trial are concerned, it is a matter of record that bail application filed by the application before this Court was disposed of with directions to the learned trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of 03 months. It appears that when the direction of this Court were not complied with within such time, the applicant repeated his bail application before trial Court, which has been dismissed, hence instant bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant again before this Court. In this respect, it is observed that the directions issued by this Court are not mandatory, but directory in nature, as such the accused cannot claim bail on this ground as a matter of right.”

            Since, bail plea of the applicant has already been declined twice by this Court and since no fresh ground has accrued and/ or agitated, as such the instant bail application being misconceived is hereby dismissed.

                                                              Judge

Ansari