IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.2618 of
2023
Before:
Mr. Justice
Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr. Justice Amjad
Ali Sahito
-----------------------------------------------
22.12.2023
Mr. A. J. K.
Marwat, advocate for applicant
Mr. Ali Haider
Saleem, Additional Prosecutor General
PI/IO Hafiz Ali
Akbar of P.S. Mochko
-------------------------------------------------
O R D E R
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Applicant/accused Parvaiz
Islam seeks post arrest bail in FIR No.384/2023, registered at P.S. SITE A,
Karachi for offences under Sections 4 / 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908
read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. Prior to this, applicant
applied for the same relief before learned Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-XIII,
Karachi in Special Case No.429/2023, the same was rejected by the trial Court
vide its order dated 11.11.2023.
2. Brief
facts leading to the filing of this application are that on 24.09.2023, ASI
Peer Bux of P.S. SITE A Karachi was busy in patrolling duty along with his
subordinate staff, he received spy information that applicant was standing at
main Khattak Chowk in a suspicious manner; the police party proceeded there and
caught him hold. From his possession, one hand-grenade No.POF70/026 was
recovered. Mashirnama of arrest and recovery was prepared. Thereafter, accused
and case property were brought to the police station and FIR was lodged against
the applicant under the above referred sections. During investigation, hand
grenade was sent to the expert and positive report was received. After usual
investigation, challan was submitted against the accused under the above
referred sections. It is informed that the case is pending before learned
Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-XIII, Karachi, where it is stated that evidence of
three PWs has been recorded and the trial is in progress.
3. Learned
advocate for the applicant/accused mainly contended that the applicant had
dispute with PC Jamshed as PC Jamshed had purchased two sacrificial animals
from the applicant, he could not pay the amount for the said animals to the
applicant and the applicant was continuously demanding such amount. Thereafter,
PC Jamshed, approached the concerned SHO and false FIR
has been registered against the applicant. It is further submitted that prior
to the arrest of the applicant, he had made calls to the high officials of the
police about his false implication in a case. It is further submitted that
prior to this, two cases were registered against the applicant, in which he has
been granted bail before arrest. It is also submitted that plea of the
applicant/accused was not recorded by IO during investigation. Lastly, it is
submitted that the applicant is in custody for more than three months, yet the trial
is not concluded and prayed for bail.
3. Mr.
Ali Haider Saleem, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh argued that hand grenade
was recovered from the possession of the applicant and the report is positive. Learned
Additional P.G. further submitted that contentions raised
by learned advocate for applicant requires deeper appreciation of evidence
which is not permissible at this stage. Learned A.P.G. pointed out that
evidence of three PWs has been recorded by the trial Court and the trial is likely
to be concluded shortly. He has seriously opposed the bail application.
4. We
have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record.
5. As
regards to the contention of learned advocate for the applicant that PC Jamshed
had dispute with applicant/accused over the payment of two sacrificial animals,
such contention can only be appreciated at trial. As regards to the defence
plea, certainly it will be considered at the time of appreciating evidence. It
is settled principle of law that deeper appreciation of evidence is not
permissible at the bail stage. It is a matter of recorded that evidence of three prosecution witnesses has
been recorded by the trial Court, trial is in progress and the proper course
for this Court in such a situation would be to direct the trial Court to
conclude the trial within a specified period. At this stage, assessment of
evidence by this Court may influence the trial Court. In the case of
REHMATULLAH vs. THE STATE and another (2011 SCMR 1332) Supreme Court of
Pakistan has held as under:
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 Rafiq 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.
5.
In the view of above, no case for
grant of bail to the applicant/accused is made out, instant criminal bail application is dismissed, with direction to the trial
Court to conclude the trial within two months, under intimation to this Court.
J U D G E
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS