ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

1^st Cr. Bail Appln. No.S- 15   of   2024.  

Date of hearing                                Order with signature of Judge.

Applicants                 :     Ali Jan Chandio & 5 others, through M/s Ashique Ali

                                          Jatoi and Naseer Ahmed Wagan, Advocates along with

                                          Applicants (on bail).     

The State                  :     Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro,  Addl. P.G.

Complainant                         :     Through Mr. Sher Ali Chandio, Advocate.

(Abdul Manan)

            Date of hearing        :  22.02.2024.

            Date of Order            :  22.02.2024.

O R D E R.

Muhammad Saleem Jessar, J.-  Through this application, applicants Ali Jan, Abdul Ghaffar @ Qurban Ali, both sons of Muhammad Ali, Dilshad son of Lutuf Ali, Suhrab son of Sikandar, Doda Khan son of Lutuf, Chanessar son of Mithal, all by caste Chandio, seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No.12 of 2023 of P.S Hamal, District Kamber-Shahdadkot, registered under Sections 337-A(i), -337-F(i), 337-F(v), 114, 506/2, 148, 149, PPC. Applicants filed anticipatory bail application vide Cr. Bail Appln. No.1544 of 2023 before the Court of Sessions Judge, Kamber-Shahdadkot at Kamber, which after hearing the parties was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kamber vide order dated 29.12.2023, hence this application has been maintained.

2.                     According to the case of prosecution, on 07.10.2023, at 10.00 a.m., near the house of complainant, the applicants, being armed with guns, cudgels and hatchet, attacked upon complainant party, wherein on the instigation of Ali Jan, applicant Dilshad caused gun butt blow to PW Imdad at his abdomen, Chanessar inflicted blunt side hatchet blow to complainant on left side of head, Doda Khan inflicted cudgel blow to PW Zulfiqar on his head and all accused inflicted gun butts and blunt side hatchet blows to complainant on different parts of his body.

3.                     Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that specific role of causing gun butt blow to injured PW Imdad is assigned to Dilshad; however, the injury allegedly sustained by injured PW Imdad has been declared by the Medicolegal Officer to be punishable u/s 337-F(v), PPC and carries five years punishment, which does not fall within prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. and submits that the case against the applicants requires further enquiry, while remaining sections are bailable. He further submits that the FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged with the delay of more than 1½ month without any plausible explanation. He submits that the parties are caste fellows, residents of same vicinity and are on disputed terms with each other and that the prosecution has been motivated against the applicants only to malign their reputation and to exert pressure upon them; hence prays for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier to the applicants.

4.                     Learned Addl. P.G. does not oppose the bail application. However, Mr. Sher Ali Chandio appearing on behalf of complainant opposes the bail application on the grounds that the applicants committed theft from the house of complainant party, which matter was reported to police and police visited the place of incident and after departure of the police the applicants assaulted upon the complainant party and caused severe injuries to them and no malafide has been urged on the part of complainant, therefore, they are not entitled for concession of pre-arrest bail.

5.                     No doubt the applicants are nominated in the FIR; however, the injuries attributed to them are bailable except injury allegedly sustained by PW Imdad, which per medico-legal certificate is punishable u/s 337-F(v), PPC and carries maximum punishment of five years, thus does not exceed the limits of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The case has been challaned, which is now pending for trial before the Magistrate. In case after recording evidence the prosecution may succeed to prove the charge against the applicants, even then punishment of more than three years cannot be visualized. No complaint with regard to misuse the concession of interim pre-arrest bail has been brought on record. In the circumstances and in view of dicta laid down by the learned Apex Court in the case of Muhammad Tanveer v. The State (PLD 2017 SC-733), case against the applicants requires further enquiry within the meaning of sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Consequently, instant bail application is hereby allowed. Resultantly, interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the applicant vide order dated 10.01.2024 is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

                                                                                                JUDGE  

Qazi Tahir/*