IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No. 625 of
2024
|
DATE |
ORDER
WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE |
Present: Mr.
Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi
30.04.2024
Mr.
Aurangzeb Gorar advocate for the applicant/accused
Peer Riaz Muhammad Shah DAG
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Naimatullah Phulpoto, J.- This is a second
bail application moved on behalf of the applicant/accused Kishore Kumar, who
was an employee of Bank Al-Falah, Mirpur Khas Branch. Prior to this, he applied
for post arrest bail before learned Judge, Special Court (Offences in Banks)
Sindh at Karachi, the same was rejected vide order dated 26.12.2023. It may be
mentioned here that first bail application No. 1572 of 2023 was moved before
this Court for the same relief, which was declined by the trial Court and the
same was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 04.10.2023.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of
the bail application are that applicant/accused Kishore Kumar is facing trial
before Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh at Karachi for offence under
Sections 409/420/422/468/471/109 PPC. Trial Court has recorded evidence of six
prosecution witnesses and trial is in progress.
3. Learned advocate for the
applicant/accused mainly contended that evidence of six prosecution witnesses
is insufficient to connect the applicant/accused in the commission of the
offences and remaining evidence will not improve the case of prosecution. It is
also argued that applicant/accused is in the custody since long and conclusion
of the trial will take some time. Lastly, argued that applicant/accused is
entitled for grant of bail.
4. Learned DAG argued that evidence of six
prosecution witnesses has already been recorded and trial Court has observed
that they have implicated the applicant/accused in the commission of the
offence. DAG submits that remaining P.Ws shall be produced before trial Court
on the next date of hearing. Lastly, argued that deeper appreciation of
evidence by this Court may prejudice the case of prosecution. In support of his
submissions, relied upon case of Rehmatullah vs. The State and another (2011
SCMR 1332).
5. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the relevant record. It appears that first bail application
moved on behalf of the applicant/accused was dismissed by this Court as not
pressed vide order dated 04.10.2023. Trial Court recorded evidence of six
prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, bail application was repeated before the
trial Court. The trial Court rejected the bail application while observing that
there is evidence against the applicant/accused in the case. Learned DAG has
pointed out that evidence of six prosecution witnesses has been recorded and
remaining P.Ws shall be produced before the trial Court on the next date of
hearing. It is settled principle of law that Courts should not grant or cancel
bail when trial is in progress and proper course for the courts in such a
situation would be to direct the trial Court to conclude the trial of the case
within a specific period as held in the case of Rehmatullah vs. The State and
another (2011 SCMR 1332). Relevant portion is reproduced as under:
3. Heard. The petitioner was granted bail
on 21.11.2008, which was cancelled by the learned High Court on 19.3.2009, when
according to the order itself the trial was at the verge of conclusion. Learned
Additional Prosecutor General stated that now only one or two witnesses are yet
to be recorded. The courts should not grant or cancel bail when the trial is in
progress and proper course for the courts in such a situation would be to
direct the learned trial Court to conclude the trial of the case within a
specified period. Reference may be made to Haji Mian Abdul Rafique v. Riaz
ud Din and another (2008 SCMR 1206). We find that the impugned order was
passed in violation of the law, therefore, we cannot subscribe to it. In view
whereof, we are persuaded to allow this petition and direct the learned trial
Court to conclude the trial of the case expeditiously.”
6. For the above stated reasons, we avoid
to record any finding on the merits of the case and dismiss the bail
application with direction to the trial Court to conclude the trial within a
period of 02 months from the date of receipt of this order.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Wasim
ps