ORDER SHEET

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

1^st Cr. Bail Appln. No.S- 542   of   2023.  

Date of hearing                                Order with signature of Judge.

1.For orders on office objection.

2.For hearing of  bail application.

Applicant

(Muhammad Bux @     :     Through Mr. Sher Ali Chandio, Advocate.

Qadeer Ali Radhan)                       

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

Date of hearing            :       01.12.2023.

O R D E R.

            Through this application, the applicant seeks his release on bail in Crime No.81 of 2023, registered at P.S Radhan Station, under Sections 380, 457, PPC. Such plea of the applicant has already been declined by the trial Court/Judicial Magistrate-III, Mehar vide order dated 11.9.2023 and then by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Mehar vide order dated 21.9.2023.

2.         Allegation against the applicant is that he along with two others trespassed into the house of complainant on the night of 28.8.2023 for committing theft; however, on the waking up of complainant and while leaving the scene by scaling over the wall of complainant’s house fell down and sustained injury; hence was apprehended along with a bangle of gold stolen from the house. His custody was then handed over to police of PS Radhan Station and was accordingly booked in this case.    

3.         Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Addl. P.G. for the State. Latter does not oppose the bail application.

4.         No doubt, the applicant was arrested at spot by the complainant and PWs, yet the version of complainant needs to be proved at trial after the complainant and his witnesses are subjected to test of cross-examination. The case is pending trial before a Magistrate, where, in case the prosecution succeeds to prove the guilt of the applicants/accused, even then the sentence for more than three years cannot be visualized. In such circumstances, it can safely be held that the offence, with which the applicant is charged, does not attract the prohibition contained in Section 497, Cr.P.C.  In the case of Manzoor alias Mumtaz v. The State (2001 PCr.LJ 344) bail was granted to an accused in an identical case. It will be appropriate to reproduce the concluding para, which reads as under:-

            “Although name of the applicant appears in the F.I.R. but the same was lodged after great delay of more than 34 hours. The F.I.R. of a criminal case mentioning the name of the accused, if not found to be promptly lodged shall not have much sanctity. The case is pending trial before a Magistrate and in such even the sentence for more than three years cannot be visualized. In view of PLD 1995 SC 34, the applicant is allowed bail subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.”

5.         Accordingly, in view of the dicta laid down in the case reported as PLD 1995 SC 34, instant bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on 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 trial Court. 

JUDGE