IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.1630 of
2023
Before:
Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito
-----------------------------------------------
23.10.2023
Mr. Shamshad Ali Qureshi, advocate
for applicant
Mr. Khadim Hussain Khuharo, Addl: P.G. Sindh
IO/PI
Muhammad Javed of AVCC, CIA, Karachi
-------------------------------------------------
O R D E R
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- This is second bail
application, moved by applicant/accused Shaharyar, in
Crime No.905/2020, registered at P.S. Gulistan-e-Johar, Karachi, for offences under Section 365-A, 395, 109,
34 PPC read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. Prior to this, bail
application of applicant/accused Shaharyar was
dismissed by this Court vide order dated 07.10.2021, with direction to the
trial Court to decide the case within two months.
2. Learned advocate for the
applicant/accused contended that evidence of 11 PWs was recorded by the trial
Court, thereafter, co-accused has been arrested, now evidence shall be recorded
afresh and it will take time. It is further submitted that evidence recorded
before the trial Court is insufficient to connect the applicant/accused in
commission of offence; that the applicant is in custody for about three years,
yet trial is not concluded. Lastly, it is submitted that co-accused Nawaz has
been granted bail by the trial Court and the case of present applicant is
identical to that of co-accused Nawaz and prayed for grant of bail.
3. Learned Additional Prosecutor General
Sindh, assisted by IO, submits that CDR of the place of incident and place of
captivity of complainant connect the applicant/accused in the commission of
offence; that ransom of Rs.228,000/- has been recovered
from the possession of the applicant/accused; that the applicant has been
involved by PWs whose evidence was recorded before the trial Court. Additional
Prosecutor General Sindh strongly opposed the bail application.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for
the parties and perused evidence recorded by the trial Court.
5. It
appears that apparently sufficient material/evidence has been brought on record
against the applicant/accused to connect him with the alleged offence; ransom
of Rs.228,000/- has also been recovered from the
possession of applicant/accused; evidence of 11 PWs has been recorded before
the trial Court and they have deposed that applicant/accused present before the
Court was same. Learned advocate for applicant/accused has touched the merits
of the case. We are not inclined to deeply examine the evidence which is
recorded by the trail Court at bail stage, which may prejudice the case of either
party. Material evidence has been recorded, no case
for grant of bail to the applicant/accused is made out. We have also perused
the order by which the bail has been granted to co-accused Nawaz, case of
present applicant/accused is quite distinguishable to that of co-accused Nawaz.
6. Prima facie, there appear reasonable
grounds for believing that the applicant/accused has committed the alleged
offence which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Accordingly,
the instant criminal bail application is dismissed, however, the trial Court is directed to conclude
the trial within a period of two months, under intimation of this Court.
7. Needless to mention here that the observations made herein above
are tentative in nature, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same
while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits.
J U D G E
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS