IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No. 1140
of 2023
|
DATE |
ORDER
WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE |
Present: Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito
For
hearing of main case
25.10.2023
Mr.
Khalid Hussain Shar advocate for the applicant/accused
Mr.
Khadim Hussain Addl. P.G
I/O
Inspector Muhammad Ali AVCC/CIA
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Naimatullah
Phulpoto, J.-Applicant/accused Ghulam Murtaza @ Murtaza
Bullo seeks pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 189/2023 for offence under Section
365-A PPC read with Section 7 of ATA 1997 registered at PS Shah Latif Town,
Karachi. Prior to this applicant/accused applied for the same relief before
learned Judge, ATC-XVIII, Karachi but the same was declined vide order dated
20.05.2023.
2. It is mainly contended that there was
delay of more than one month in lodging of the FIR for which no plausible
explanation has been furnished; that ingredients of extortion from the contents
of the FIR and other material collected during investigation are not made out.
As regards to the malafide on the part of the complainant, it is contended that
an application under Section 22-A/B Cr.P.C filed by complainant Nadeem against
the applicant/accused and others in which he was one of the proposed accused.
It is also argued that material evidence has been recorded, no useful purpose
will be served by remanding the applicant/accused to jail on technical ground.
Lastly, it is argued that case of the applicant/accused requires further
inquiry.
3. Addl. P.G submits that applicant/accused
has been nominated in the FIR and sufficient material has been collected
against him. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail.
4. We are inclined to grant pre-arrest
bail to the applicant/accused for the reasons that extortion is between robbery
and theft. Apparently, the ingredients of the extortion from the contents of
the FIR and other material collected during investigation are not attracted. Incident
had occurred on 11.01.2023 whereas matter was reported to the police on
13.02.2023, delay of more than one month in lodging of FIR has not been
explained plausibly. As regards to the malafide
on the part of the complainant, it is pointed out by learned advocate for the
applicant/accused that before lodging of the FIR, an application under Section
22-A/B Cr.P.C was filed by the complainant before I-Additional Sessions
Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Malir, Karachi, in which the
applicant/accused was shown as proposed accused.
5. Taking
into consideration all the facts and circumstances, a case for confirmation of
pre-arrest bail is made out, consequently, instant pre-arrest bail application
is allowed. Interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant/accused is
hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions. However, trial Court is
directed to conclude the case expeditiously.
6. Needless,
to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature
and would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case on merits.
7. The
instant bail application is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Wasim
ps