IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

            Crl. Bail. Appln. No.S-215 of 2025                       

       

                   

DATE OF

HEARING

 

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE.

 

1.    For orders on O/objection at flag-A.

2.    For hearing of pre-arrest bail.

         

 

Date of hearing     04.11.2025.

 

 

Mr. Rukhsar Ahmed Junejo, Advocate for applicants.

 

Syed Sardar Ali Shah, Addl. Prosecutor General for State.

                                            ************

 

 

 

                                                O R D E R

 

         

 

          In this bail application for applicant No.1 same was not pressed on 07.04.2025 and only applicant No.2 his role it is alleged in the FIR that he alongwith another unknown person caused injuries to the victim alongwith the main accused.

 

In respect to the complainant repeatedly notices have been served however, he has failed to respond and effect appearance today also report has been submitted despite caution given on the earlier date an absence of the complainant is there.

 

          Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the injuries attributed to the present applicant were reported to be on the legs which are not found mentioned in the postmortem report. He further contends that the injuries attributed to the other accused though mentioned therein the absence provides the present applicant Syed Majid Ali Shah @ Majid Shah ground for further inquiry. Learned counsel also contends that the FIR was lodged with much delay and that the present applicant is not abuse the concession of bail.

 

          Learned Additional Prosecutor General in the matter opposes bail contending that direct allegations are present in respect to the present applicant. Learned Addl.P.G states that the injuries are mentioned referred in the danishnama however, concedes that they are not available in the postmortem report.

 

Having heard the learned counsels and gone through the record. Apparently, the major injuries have been attributed to the co-accused. The injuries attributes to the present applicant are though not mentioned in the postmortem allows the ground of further inquiry available to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the order dated 12.03.2025 except for above stands confirmed on same terms and conditions.

 

 

         

          Needless to mention here that observation as above are tentative in nature and not meant to affect merits of the case before the learned trial Court.

 

Bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.

 

                                                                                         J U D G E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ihsan/PS.