ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail
Application No.611 of 2025
Criminal Bail Application No.612
of 2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For hearing of bail
applications
------------------------------------------
12.05.2025
Mr.
Rafiq Ahmed Baloch,
advocate for applicant
Ms.
Rubina Qadir, D.P.G.
------------------------------------
Applicant Tariq Ahmed son of Naseer Ahmed, seeks post arrest bail in FIR No.168/2023 for offence under
sections 397 PPC and FIR No.181/2023,
for offence under section 23(1)(a) of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013, registered at
P.S. Gharo.
2. Facts involved in the aforesaid cases are
that on 03.11.2023 robbery was
committed in the rice mill of complainant and the accused robbed about Rs.914000/-, two gold rings and three
mobile phones from complainant and other persons. During investigation of FIR
No.168/2023, applicant was arrested and from his possession, one unlicensed
weapon, Rs.440,000/- and robbed I-Phone were recovered
from his possession, hence FIR No.181/2023.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has
placed on record depositions of complainant and witness/mushir
Piyasi Kumar, which reveals that both private
witnesses, namely, Deepak Kumar and Piyasi Kumar have
clearly stated in their examination-in-chief that the accused were in muffled
faces. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he
has been falsely implicated in these cases and even the complainant has not
supported the prosecution case; that weapon allegedly recovered from possession
of applicant has been foisted upon him in order to strengthen the main case; that
the case of applicant requires further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC.
4. Learned D.P.G. has opposed for grant of
bail on the ground that IO found the applicant guilty, therefore, he has
submitted challan against him.
5. Heard learned counsel for applicant as
well as learned D.P.G. and perused the material available on record.
6. It is matter of record that at trial
complainant Deepak Kumar and PW Piyasi Kumar have
been examined by the trial Court wherein they both have categorically stated
that accused were in muffled faces. Counsel for applicant has taken plea that
weapon allegedly recovered from the possession of applicant has been foisted
upon him in order to strengthen the main case. Since complainant party of
robbery case is not supporting the prosecution case, therefore, the case of
applicant requires further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC and rule in such cases is bail and its refusal is an
exception, as held by apex Court in the case of Muhammad Tanveer
versus State (PLD 2017 SC 733). Therefore, the applicant is admitted to bail in
both the aforesaid cases, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- in each case to the satisfaction of the
trial Court.
7. The observations made herein above are
tentative in nature the same would not prejudice the case of either party at
trial.
Office to place
copy of this order in Criminal Bail Application No.612/2025.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS