IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail
Application No.2601 of 2024
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For hearing of bail application
-----------------------------
17.02.2025
Mr. Amjad Hussain, advocate for
applicant
Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional
Prosecutor General Sindh
Mr. Aziz-ur-Rehman Khilji, advocate
for complainant
---------------
---------------------
Applicants/accused
Bismillah Khan, Irfan Khan and Nawabzada are present on interim pre-arrest
granted to them by this Court vide order dated 08.11.2024 in FIR No.128/2024,
registered at P.S. Yousuf Plaza, Karachi Central for offence under sections
337A(i), 337A(ii), 337L(ii), 506, 34, PPC.
2. It is
alleged in the FIR that on monetary issue applicants/accused caused injuries to
complainant on his head and other parts of his body. Per medical certificate,
all the injuries attributed to applicants/accused are bailable, except single injury
falls under section 337A(ii), PPC, which is compoundable. Counsel for applicants/accused
submits that there is general allegation against the applicants/accused and it
is yet to be determined at trial, who caused the injury to complainant which is
non-bailable.
3. Counsel
for complainant has filed objections for grant of bail to applicants/accused,
which are taken on record. He raised serious objection for grant of bail to
applicants/accused.
4. Learned
Additional Prosecutor General Sindh opposed the bail application on the ground
that the applicants/accused have caused injury to the complainant, which is non-bailable.
5. Perusal
of record reveals that there is a delay of 26 days in lodging the FIR, as the
alleged incident had taken place on 04.10.2024 whereas the aforesaid FIR was
lodged on 30.10.2024, without any plausible explanation for such inordinate
delay. All the sections applied in the FIR are bailable, except a single injury
which falls under section 337A(ii), PPC, which is not bailable but it does not
fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC. It is settled law that grant of bail in the
offences not falling within the prohibitory clause is a rule and the refusal is
an exception. Reliance is placed on the case of Ali Anwar Paracha versus the State and another (2024 SCMR 1596). Case is challaned and applicants are facing trial.
5. Taking into consideration all facts and
circumstances, interim pre-arrest bail already granted to applicants/accused is
hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions. However, trial Court is
directed to conclude the case expeditiously.
6. Needless,
to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature
and would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case on merits.
7. The instant bail application is
accordingly disposed of.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS