THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Ist Cr. Bail Appln. No. S-531 of 2024

Applicant:               Abdullah, son of Sobho Nindwani,

Through Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, Advocate.

Respondent:          The State, through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing:     26.09.2024

Date of Order:        26.09.2024

O R D E R

KHADIM HUSSAIN SOOMRO, Through instant Criminal Bail Application, applicant Abdullah, son of Sobho Nindwani, seeks post-arrest bail in the case emanating from F.I.R No.19/2024, registered at Police Station Buxapur, for an offence punishable under Sections 23(1)(a) of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013 after his bail plea was declined by the learned Sessions Judge, Kashmore at Kandhkot vide Order dated 28.03.2024.

2.                  Concisely, the allegation, as per F.I.R., against the applicant/accused is that on 11.03.2024, at about 1700 hours, on the basis of spy information and required in Crime No.17/2024 under section 399, 402, P.P.C. of PS Buxapur, he was arrested by the police party headed by A.S.I. Nawab Khan from Shahi Bridge near Bahar Shah curve and from his possession, an unlicensed and without number 30 bore T.T. Pistol with a magazine containing four live bullets of 30 bore were recovered; such memo of arrest and recovery was prepared, as such, F.I.R. of the incident was lodged on behalf of the State.

3.                  Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that since the applicant/accused has been granted bail in the main case and this is an offshoot of the said main case, he may also be enlarged on bail in this case.

4.                  I have heard counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh, and perused the material available on record. 

5.                  The applicant has been granted bail in the main case, and considering that the present case is a derivative of the same, it warrants the applicant's release on bail. It makes the case one of further inquiry. It is an age-old truth that if an accused is mistakenly set free on bail and subsequently found guilty of the alleged charge after trial, he shall once again be apprehended and placed in custody. However, suppose the prosecution fails to substantiate their case against the accused after a lengthy trial. In that case, the precious moments lost by the accused in confinement and the hardships endured cannot be rectified.

6.                  In view of the above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty Thousand)and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

7.                  Needless to mention, the observations made hereinabove are tentative and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of either party at trial.

                                   Judge