IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Misc.
Application No.1168 of 2024
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
1.
For orders on M.A. No.15799/2024
2. For
hearing of main case
---------------------------------------------
19.05.2025
Mr. Jameel
Ahmed, advocate for applicant
Mr. Tahir Hussain Mangi, A.P.G.
Mr. Zakir Hussain Bhirejo, advocate for
respondents
------------------------------------
Applicant/complainant
Ali Ahmed has filed instant criminal miscellaneous application for cancellation
of bail under section 497(5), Cr.PC, granted to
respondents 1 and 2 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Malir Karachi vide order dated 30.10.2024.
2. Briefly
the facts of the case are that on 16.04.2024, complainant lodged FIR alleging
therein that Muzafar Ali alias Majju
Qambarni convinced his brother Ghulam
Ali to reside at Razzaqabad in a rented house because
said Muzafar Ali alias Majju
had illicit relations with his wife Mehrunnissa,
which later came to the knowledge of his brother. On 08.04.2024 at 10:00 hours,
his brother Ali Murad informed him through phone call
that his brother Ghulam Ali has committed suicide and
his dead body was taken to Jinnah Hospital. Later on, he came to know that it
was not a suicide but his brother was murdered by his wife Mehrunnissa
and Muzafar Ali alias Majju,
hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned
counsel for applicant submits that delay has been well-explained by complainant
in FIR; that alleged offence is heinous one and comes within the ambit of
prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC; that respondents
1 and 2 were admitted to pre-arrest bail, which is an extraordinary relief and
learned trial Court has not considered material available on record before it.
He further submits that after filing of application for cancellation of bail,
respondents 1 and 2 have issued threats to the complainant party to withdraw
from the case.
4. On
the other hand, learned A.P.G. assisted by counsel for respondents, supported
the impugned order and submits that learned trial Court has rightly granted
pre-arrest bail to respondents 1 and 2 on the ground that there is no direct
evidence against the respondents; medical evidence could not substantiate the
case against respondents/accused. Learned A.P.G. has further pointed out that
complainant can approach learned trial Court for cancellation of bail on the
ground that respondents/accused have issued threats to the complainant party after
grant of pre-arrest bail.
5. Heard
learned counsel for applicant, learned A.P.G., assisted by learned counsel for
respondents and perused the material available on record.
6. I
have gone through the impugned order and found reasonable grounds for grant of
bail such as 8 days’ delay in lodging of FIR and no direct evidence against
respondents, therefore, learned trial Court has rightly admitted the
respondents 1 and 2 to pre-arrest bail which, no doubt, is an extraordinary
relief. It is well settled law by now that merits can be touched in a case of pre-arrest bail
as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as Khair
Muhammad and another Vs. The State through P.G.Punjab and another (2021 SCMR 130). I do not see any illegality committed by
learned trial Court while granting bail to respondents/accused. Even otherwise,
consideration for grant of bail and its cancellation are entirely different as
reported by Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Saeedullah
& 2 Others versus The State (2023 SCMR 1397), Samiullah
and another versus Laiq Zada
and another (2020 SCMR 1115) and Shahid Arshad versus Muhamad Naqi Butt and 2 others (1976 SCMR 360). Respondent No.2 Mst.
Mehrunnissa is present along with her three minor
sons. Therefore, instant criminal miscellaneous application is dismissed.
However, complainant is at liberty to approach learned trial Court for
cancellation of bail if respondents 1 and 2 have misused the concession of bail
by issuing threats of dire consequences to complainant party to withdraw from
this case.
7. The
above observations are tentative in nature, same would
not prejudice the case of either party on merits.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS