ORDER SHEET

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

1^st Cr. Bail Appln. No.S- 444 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.                        

26.10.2023.

Mr.Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Imran Mobeen Khan, Asstt: P.G.

 Complainant is present in person.

O R D E R.

                        Through this application, applicant Imran Ali Lashari seeks his admission on pre arrest bail in Crime No.72 of 2023 P.S Civil Line Jacobabad under Section 337-F(v), 506/2, 114, 504, 34 PPC.  The case has also been challaned by the police which is now pending for trial before the Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Jacobabad where the case is fixed for evidence on 28.10.2023. The applicant preferred his bail application before the Court of Sessions which after hearing the parties was declined vide its order dated 02.8.2023. Hence this application has been maintained.

                        Learned counsel submits that the FIR is delayed for about 12 days.  Besides there is enmity between the applicant as well as complainant  over issue of Court marriage of step sister of the complainant of the complainant with brother of applicant namely Ahsan Ali. He next submits that Mst.Saima  the step sister of the complainant alongwith her spouse Ahsan Ali (brother of the applicant) had appeared before  this Court through C.P No.D-208 of 2023 re: Mst.Saima v. SHO P.S Saddar Jacobabad and others  where they were granted  protection and the FIR No.555 of 2023 lodged by one Dur Muhammad father of Mst.Saima  was also disposed of.  He next  submits  that present complainant Ashique Ali was also shown respondent No.7 in the petition.  He  submits  copy of order dated 18.4.2023 passed by this Court  in C.P No.D-208 of 2023 under cover of statement dated 26.10.2023, taken on record.  As far as injury allegedly sustained by injured P.W is concerned, he submits that the applicant has been assigned role of causing knife blow  to complainant which hit on his left hand  and the injury has been declared  by the Medico Legal Officer falling under Section 337-F(v) which carries  maximum punishment upto five years.  Hence the case  against the applicant requires further enquiry, therefore, prays for grant of pre arrest bail.

                        Learned Addl. P.G while going through the police papers submits that per memo of injuries, the injured has been shown to have sustained single injury whereas per Medico Legal Officer three injuries have been shown to have been sustained by him. He further submits that offence does not fall under prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C and while placing his reliance  on the case of Saeedullah & 2 others v. The State (2023 SCMR 1397), he has extended no objection for grant of bail.

                        Complainant Ashique Ali is present  in person and submits that the allegations leveled by the applicant that due to enmity over issue of his sister  he has been implicated  is nothing but bundle of lies;  the applicant had borrowed  some amount from him  which he demanded on which he become annoyed and caused injury therefore, applicant is not entitled for bail, therefore, he may be taken into custody. 

                        Mr. Rafique Ahmed Abro holding brief for Mr.Z.A Channa advocate for the complainant adopts the arguments advanced by the complainant himself.

                        Admittedly the FIR is delayed by 12 days for which no plausible explanation has been furnished by the prosecution for such an inordinate delay  which has always been found, and held by the Superior Courts  to be fatal for the prosecution. Per injuries as well as medical evidence the offence with which applicant stands charged carries maximum punishment upto five years, hence does not exceed the limits of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C.  Case is being tried by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Jacobabad where, after recording evidence of prosecution witnesses, if prosecution may succeed to prove its charge against accused even then punishment of more than three years can not be visualized. The applicant, as stated, has also joined trial proceedings and no complaint with regard to misuse of concession of bail has been reported against him.

                        In the circumstances and in view of dicta laid down by the apex Court in the case of Muhammad Tanveer v. The State & another (PLD 2017 S.C 733), the case against the applicant requires further enquiry. Accordingly, instant bail application is allowed. The interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicant vide order dated 11.8.2023 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

JUDGE 

Shabir