THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Criminal Bail No.S-359 of 2024
Applicant: Hair-ul-Din son of Khamiso alias Khamiso Khan Mazarithrough Miss. ReshmaZangejo, Advocate.
Complainant: Mehmood son of GahloonMazari, present in person.
The State: Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.
Date of Hearing: 28.08.2024
Date of Order: 28.08.2024
O R D E R
KHADIM HUSSAIN SOOMRO, J. :- Through instant Criminal Bail Application, Applicant Hair-ul-Din Mazariseeks Bail Before Arrest in the case emanating from F.I.R No.09/2024, registered at Police Station Geehalpur, District Kashmore-Kandhkotunder Sections 337-A(i), 337-F(i)(v), 504, 114, 147, 148 P.P.C. after his bail plea was declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kashmorevide Order dated 14.06.2024.
2. The facts as per F.I.R. are that on 29.05.2024, Complainant alongwith his sons namely Liaquat, Farooq, Barkat, nephew Sharbat and cousins Ahsan Ali and Akbar were busy in the agricultural work at their land when at about 09:00 a.m they saw accused Hair-ul-Din, Suleman, Habib armed with lathis, Issa, Sadam alias Sadoro, armed with Kalashnikov (K.K.), Bhutto alias Dado, Ali Muhammad, Azizullah andShaban,all by caste Mazari, duly armed with lathis and two unknown persons armed with K.K came at the place of incident; accused IssaMazari instigated other co-accused, on which accused Hair-ul-Din caused lathi blows to Ahsan, which hit him on his right arm, and on his left arm, accused Suleman alias Saloo caused lathi blow to the Complainant, which hit on his head and other accused also caused lathi blows to the complainant party and the armed persons started aerial firing in order to create harassment, thereafter, complainant party started hue and cry prompting the accused to flee upon noticing other villagers coming. The complainant party sustained injuries during the incident, proceeded to the police station to report the matter, and subsequently obtained a medical treatment letter before registration of F.I.R.
3. Learned counsel for the Applicant has contended that the Applicant/accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated by the Complainant with malafide intention and ulterior motives; that there is dispute between the parties over the landed property; that there is delay of two days in lodging of the F.I.R. which has not been plausibly explained by the Complainant; that the injured/victim Ahsan has no objection for grant of bail to the Applicant/accused, in this regard he has filed Affidavit of no objection before this Court. Therefore, interim pre-arrest bail granted to the Applicant/accused vide order dated 26.06.2024 may be confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor Generalfrankly conceded to the grant of bail to the Applicant/accused on the ground that the lesser punishment in the offence with which the Applicant/accused is charged carries three and five years punishment, and at the bail stage, lesser punishment is to be considered, and the injured/victim and the Complainant have raised no objection for grant of bail to the Applicant/accused.
5. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant/learned Deputy Prosecutor General and the Complainant and perused the material available on record.
6. The parties involved in this matter have reached a mutually agreeable settlement outside of the Court, resolving the dispute amicably. The offence, as alleged in the present case, is compoundable. The Complainant, as well as the injured, have sworn their Affidavit of no objection to confirmation of instant pre-arrest bail. The learned Additional Prosecutor General also raised his no objection.
7. In view of the above,instant Criminal Bail Application is allowed. The interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the Applicant/accused vide order dated 26.06.2024 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
8. Needless to mention here 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.
Judge
Manzoor