ORDER SHEET

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

1^st Cr. Bail Appln. No.D- 23 of 2023.

Date Order with signature of Hon’ble Judge

1.For orders on office objection as flag A.

2.For hearing of bail application.

01.11.2023.

Mr. Inam u Rehman Abro, advocate a/w the applicants (on bail).

Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G. for the State.

O R D E R.

Through this application, the applicants/accused seek their admission on pre arrest bail in Crime No.105 of 2023 of P.S A-Section Thul, District Jacobabad for offence under Sections 341, 353, 143, 504, 147, 148, 149 PPC. The applicants preferred anticipatory bail application before the trial Court vide Cr. Bail Appln. No.29 of 2023 which, after notice and hearing the other side, was declined by means of order dated 26.7.2023, hence this application has been maintained. The case has been challaned and is now pending before the Court of Special Judge, Anti-terrorism Court, Shikarpur vide Special Case No.37 of 2023 re: State v. Khuda Bux and others.

Learned counsel for the applicant places on record case diary dated 05.10.2023 issued by Anti-terrorism Court, Shikarpur (trial Court) in respect of Special Case No.37 of 2023 re: State v. Khuda Bux and others under cover of statement dated 01.11.2023, taken on record. Perusal of diary reveals that the applicants after furnishing surety before this court on 08.8.2023 have joined trial proceedings before the trial Court on 05.10.2023.

Since the facts of the prosecution case are already mentioned in the FIR as well as bail application and the order passed by trial Court, therefore, there is no need to reproduce the same.

Learned counsel submits that applicants had committed no offence as the allegations against them are that they had formed unlawful assembly and were holding procession however, the applicants were not armed or lace with any lethal weapon which may show the applicants had any intention to commit crime. He next submits that the police in order to get shield from their superiors have maneuvered instant case against them and as far as causing deterrence in performance of their lawful duties is concerned, it is yet to be established after recording evidence. He next submits that neither the applicants had grappled with the police as alleged nor ripped their uniform or shirt button but in order to strengthen the rope of their false case the police have cooked up such long bullock story which has no independent legs to stand upon. He further submits that the applicants are law abiding citizens who after furnishing surety have joined trial proceedings where charge against them has been framed and now case against them before trial Court is fixed for evidence on 09.11.2023. As far as application of ATA Sections is concerned, learned counsel submits that same are yet to be determined by the trial Court after recording evidence of prosecution witnesses and at this juncture he prays for confirmation of bail.

Mr.Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G opposes bail application on the ground that applicants are nominated in the FIR with specific role of deterring the police from discharging their official duty by pushing back the police personnel as well as ripping their shirts. He; however, could not controvert the fact that applicants were empty handed and had not caused any grievous injury to any member from police party.

We have heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned D.P.G and have gone through the material placed before us on record.

As far as indulgence of some of the applicants under 4^th Schedule is concerned, their names were kept by the state in the year 2021 and then right from the year 2021 to date said applicants have not violated the undertaking extended by them before the police through which it could be deduced that the applicants had violated the conditions given by them in their respective undertaking before the police. All the sections applied in the FIR are bailable except Section 11(e)/7 ATA which are yet to be established by the prosecution through its evidence and then the trial Court being competent has to determine such accusation against them. The applicants have not misused the concession extended to them by this Court which may warrant cancellation of their bail. Besides they have joined trial proceedings where charge against them has been framed. No specific role or overt act is assigned to any of the accused except their general role which too create a room for further probe into the allegations leveled by the prosecution.

In the circumstances and in view of above, we are of the view that the applicants have made out prima facie case for further enquiry in terms of Section 497 (2) Cr.P.C. and are entitled for bail. Consequently instant bail application is hereby allowed. The interim bail granted to the applicants on 08.8.2023 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

JUDGE

Shabir