THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

1^st Criminal Bail No.S-555 of 2022

Applicant:            Zaheer Mahar through Mr. Shahabaz Ali Brohi, Advocate.

Complainant:      Lakhmir Mahar, preset in person.

Respondent:        The State

Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing:  08.12.2022

Date of Order:     08.12.2022

O R D E R

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- Through instant Criminal Bail Application, applicant/accused Zaheer son of Wazir Mahar seeks post-arrest bail in Crime No. 11/2020, offence under Sections 302, 114, 148, 149, 337-H(ii) P.P.C P.P.C of the Police Station Chak, district Shikarpur. Prior to this, he filed such application, but the same was turned down by the Court of 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur vide Order dated 31.10.2022; hence he filed instant Criminal Bail Application.

2.                The details and particulars of the F.I.R. are already available in the bail application  and F.I.R., same could not gathered from the copy of F.I.R. attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

3.                Per learned counsel, the applicant/accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant with malafide intention and ulterior motives; that there is enmity between the applicant and the complainant, as such false implication cannot be ruled out. He further added that incident had taken place in the odd hours and it is impossible in dark night to identify the accused persons; that the F.I.R. is delayed about two days and it is not plausibly explained by the complainant; that the applicant/accused caused firearm injuries to the deceased, which hit on his arms, which are non vital parts of the body.  He lastly requests for grant of bail to the applicant/accused.

4.                On the other hand, complainant as well as learned Deputy Prosecutor General vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the applicant accused.

5.                Heard and perused. Admittedly, on the day of incident, present applicant alongwith four co-accused, duly armed with deadly weapons appeared at the place of incident and the present applicant/accused fired from his Kalashnikov upon deceased Barkat Ali with intention to commit his murder, which hit on his right arm, elbow and other parts of the body. After receiving injuries he had become injured, subsequently shifted to hospital, where he succumbed to injuries. The P.Ws in their 161 Cr.P.C. statements have fully supported the version of the complainant.  The ocular evidence finds support from the medical evidence. At bail stage only tentative assessment is to be made. Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to make out the case for further investigation under sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Consequently, instant Criminal Bail Application is dismissed having no merits.

6.                Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of either party at trial.

                                J U D G E

Manzoor