IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.2772 of
2023
Before:
Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr. Justice Khadim Hussain Tunio
-----------------------------------------------
14.02.2024
Mr. Muhammad Ajmal
Jatoi, advocate for applicant
Ms. Rahat Ehsan,
Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
Complainant
Khadim Hussain present
IO/PI Muhammad
Ali of AVCC/CIA, Karachi & PI Abdul Rashid of P.S. Sohrab Goth
-------------------------------------------------
O R D E R
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Applicant/accused
Muhammad Akram Butt seeks post arrest bail in FIR No.46/2022 for offences under sections 365-A/34, PPC read with
section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, registered at Police Station Sohrab
Goth, Karachi. Prior to this, applicant/accused applied for same relief before
learned Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-X, Karachi, the same was rejected vide
order dated 08.09.2023. Thereafter, the applicant/accused approached this
Court.
2. Learned advocate for the
applicant/accused mainly contended that there was delay of one day in lodging
of the FIR for which no plausible explanation has been furnished; that evidence
of two prosecution witnesses has been recorded and there is no material to connect
the applicant/accused in the commission of the offence. Lastly argued that
remaining evidence will not improve case of prosecution and applicant/accused
is in jail since last more than six months and prayed for grant of bail to the
applicant/accused in this case.
3. Learned
Additional Prosecutor General Sindh argued that case has proceeded before the
trial Court and evidence of two prosecution witnesses has been recorded, yet
evidence of abductee Muhammad Ajmal is to be recorded by the trial Court. It is
also argued that abductee has fully implicated the applicant/accused in 161,
Cr.PC statement and opposed the bail application.
4. Complainant
submits that applicant/accused Muhammad Akram Butt had kidnapped Muhammad Ajmal
for ransom.
5. Before hearing of bail application,
progress report was called from the trial Court, which reflects that trial
Court has recorded evidence of two prosecution witnesses, yet evidence of
abductee Muhammad Ajmal is to be recorded. Record reflects that Bail
Application No.728/2022 filed by co-accused Zeeshan was dismissed by this Court
as not pressed with direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within
two months. Prima facie, there is sufficient material against the
applicant/accused to connect him in the commission of offence for the reason
that abductee has fully implicated the applicant/accused in his 161 and 164,
Cr.PC statements. Alleged offence is punishable for death or
imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to forfeiture of property. Moreover, case has proceeded before
the trial Court and evidence of two prosecution witnesses has been recorded. This Court has
already issued direction to the trial Court to conclude the trial within two
months while hearing the bail application of co-accused Zeeshan vide order
dated 16.08.2022. At this stage, deeper
assessment of evidence by this Court may influence the trial Court. In the
case of REHMATULLAH vs. THE STATE and another (2011 SCMR 1332) Supreme Court of
Pakistan has held as under:
“The courts should not grant or cancel bail when the
trial is in progress and proper course for the courts in such a situation would
be to direct the learned trial Court to conclude the trial of the case within a
specified period. Reference may be made to Haji Mian Abdul Rafiq v. Riaz ud Din
and another (2008 SCMR 1206). We find that the impugned order was passed in
violation of the law, therefore, we cannot subscribe to it. In view whereof, we
are persuaded to allow this petition and direct the learned trial Court to
conclude the trial of the case expeditiously.”
6. For the
above stated reasons, bail application is without merits, the same is
accordingly dismissed. However, the
trial Court is directed to decide the case within two months under intimation
to this Court through MIT-II.
J U D G E
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS