IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Criminal Bail Appln. No. S-122 of 2025
|
Applicant |
: |
Dhani Bux Thaheem |
|
|
|
Through Mr. Aijaz Ali Kalhoro, advocate |
|
|
|
|
|
Complainant |
|
Nadir Hussain Thaheem |
|
|
|
Through Mr. Muhammad Bux Wahocho, advocate |
|
|
|
|
|
The State |
: |
Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G for the State |
|
|
|
|
|
Date of hearing |
|
23-04-2025 |
|
Date of order |
|
23-04-2025 |
O R D E R
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- Through instant criminal bail application, applicant/accused Dhani Bux Thaheem seeks interim pre-arrest bail in Crime No.18/2025, for the offence U/s 337-F(i), 337-F(v),504 and 34 P.P.C, registered at Police Station Waggan. Prior to this, he filed such application but the same was turned down by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kambar, vide order dated 26.02.2025, hence he has filed instant criminal bail application.
2. The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant/accused are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant; that there is delay of 12 days in registration of F.I.R; that role has been assigned is that he hit Mst. Saima on the left hand and other accused persons hit her with legs and fist blows; that two co-accused Mst. Abida and Abdul Kareem have already been granted pre-arrest bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kambar, as such applicant is entitled for grant of interim pre-arrest bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed for grant of bail on the ground that applicant/accused is nominated in F.I.R with specific role of causing serious injures to injured Mst. Samina; the version of complainant is supported by his witnesses; delay is well explained; therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail.
5. On the other hand, learned D.P.G. has also opposed for grant of bail and prayed for dismissal of the bail.
6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned D.P.G. as well as gone through the material available on the record.
7. From perusal of record, it reflects that injured P.W Mst. Samina received injuries at hands of applicant/accused Dhani Bux and co-accused Mehmood, the injury attributed to applicant/accused Dhani Bux is declared as Ghayr-Jaifah-Hashimah, hence his case appears severe in nature; specific role of inflicting a serious injury on injured's left hand has been assigned to present applicant/accused as the injury has been declared as Ghayr-Jaifah-Hashimah, which is not bailable.
8. At bail stage, only a tentative assessment is to be seen. Learned counsel for the applicant has not pleaded malafide on the part of the complainant. Ocular evidence finds support from the medical evidence. No ill will or enmity has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is essential requirement for the pre-arrest bail.
9. In view of above, the learned counsel for applicant/accused has failed to make out case for grant of interim pre-arrest bail in view of subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Resultantly, instant bail application is dismissed. Interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted vide order dated 10.03.2025 is hereby recalled.
10. 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