IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

Cr. Bail Appln. No.S-261   of  2023

Mohammad Ramzan Brohi

Vs

The State

Applicant           :   Through M/s Ali Nawaz Ghanghro and Mumtaz Ali

                             Jessar, Advocates.

State                 :   Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Additional

                              Prosecutor General. 

Complainant      :   Mst. Noor Bibi, Through Mr. Riaz Hussain Khoso,

                              Advocate.  

Date of hearing      :  17.07.2023.

Date of Decision    :  17.07.2023.

O R D E R.

                        Applicant Mohammad Ramzan Brohi seeks post arrest bail in Crime No.15/2023, registered at Police Station Sachal, Larkana, under Sections 302, 311, 364, 201, 120-B, 34, PPC.

            2.         The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and crime report, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with the bail application, hence needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

            3.         Per learned Counsel, the applicant/accused is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case; that the name of the applicant does not transpire in the FIR and no role has been assigned against him; per learned Counsel, on the basis of the statement of the co-accused the applicant/accused is booked in this case, otherwise, in view of the Article 39 of the Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order, 1984 confession before the police officer is inadmissible. He further contended that after recording statement of co-accused Saifullah and others, they were not produced before the Magistrate for recording their confessional statement u/s 164, Cr.P.C. He submits that the applicant/accused is in jail, he is no more required for further investigation.

            4.         On the other hand, learned Addl. P.G. half-heartedly opposed the for grant of bail.

            5.         Learned Counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed for grant of bail and states that in view of Article 40 of Qanoon-e-Shahdat, the co-accused has confessed before the police and subsequently the applicant/accused was booked in this case. He further contended that the applicant/accused has hached a conspiracy which is evident from the record, as such, he is not entitled for grant of concession of bail. 

            6.         Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

            7.         From perusal of record it reflects that in the presence of the complainant party the deceased Ali Ahmed went to one Khan Mohammad and Azizullah and subsequently he was missed. Admittedly, the name of the applicant/accused does not transpire in the FIR, no specific role has been assigned against applicant/accused. So far the role assigned against applicant/accused is on the basis of the statement of the co-accused he has been booked and as per statement of the co-accused that he has instigated against him. No evidence has been brought on the record as when and where he has instigated and any conspiracy was hached, which requires further enquiry. At this stage, only a tentative assessment is to be made. The learned Counsel for the applicant also pleaded malafide and enmity on part of the complainant party. Learned Counsel for the applicant has made out case for grant of bail in view of sub-section(2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Resultantly, instant bail application is allowed. The applicant/accused is granted bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

                        Needless to mention that all above observations are tentative in nature and will not influence the trial Court, in any manner, while dealing with the trial of the Court.

                                                                                                JUDGE

Qazi Tahir PA/*