IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
1st. Cr. Bail Application No. S- 329 of 2023
Applicant: Ali Gul Luhur
Though Mr. Farhat Ali Bugti,
The State: Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh.
Date of hearing: 03-08-2023
Date of order: 03-08-2023
O R D E R
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J:- Through instant criminal bail application, the applicant, seeks post arrest bail in Crime No.28/2023, registered at Police Station Aqil, for offence under sections 302, 337-A(i), F(i), 506/2, 337-H(2), 114, 148, 149 PPC. Prior to this he filed such application but the same was turned down by the Court of III-Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana vide Order dated 14.06.2023; hence he filed instant criminal bail application.
2. The details and particulars of the F.I.R. are already available in the bail application, same could be gathered from the copy of F.I.R. attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.
3. Per learned counsel the applicant/accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to previous enmity with the complainant party. He further submitted that applicant has not caused any injury to the deceased, however, only allegation of causing danda blow to the nephew of complainant Asif Ali and as per medical certificate doctor has declared that injury 337-A(i) which is bailable. The applicant/accused is in jail and he is no more required for further investigation, hence he requested for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand learned Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh vehemently opposed the grant of bail and states that the vicarious liability is also available on the record as he has participated in the commission of offence as such he is not entitled for the grant of bail.
5. Heard and perused.
6. No doubt the name of applicant /accused transpires in the FIR with allegation that he being armed with danda has caused danda blow to the nephew of complainant Asif Ali but no specific role has been assigned to him that he has caused any injury to the deceased Munawar Ali, if any injury is against accused Yaqoob that he hit axe/hatchet to the cousin of complainant Munawar Ali which hit at his head. In the case of Qurban Ali v. the State and others 2017 SCMR 279, Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan has granted bail to the accused who have not been attributed any overt act during the occurrence except the role of raising lalkara. Trial court in such circumstances had to determine recording probe and contra evidence whether the accused was vicariously liable for the act of his co-accused. The case against the accused is one of further inquiry. In another case of Mumtaz Ali and 5 others V. the State 1996 SCMR 1125, bail was granted to the applicant /accused despite being allegedly armed with deadly weapons but he has only caused simple blunt injuries to some of prosecution witnesses. Question whether the accused in such circumstances shared his common intention with co-accused who had caused death of deceased needed further inquiry. The applicant /accused is in jail and he is no more a required for further investigation. Further detention will not improve the case of prosecution the learned counsel for the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail in view of subsection 2 of section 497 Cr.PC resultantly, instant bail application is allowed. The applicant/accused is enlarged on bail subject to furnishing his surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (rupees one lac and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
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
S.Ashfaq