IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

 

Crl. Bail Application No.S-820 of 2024

Crl. Bail Application No.S-868 of 2024

Crl. Bail Application No.S-58 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     16.09.2025.

 

 

Mr. Wazir Ahmed Ghoto, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. Farman Ali Shar, Advocate for complainant.

Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, D.P.G for State.

                         ********

 

 

                                                O R D E R

 

         

 

          All these three pre-arrest bail applications have been filed in respect to Crime No.430 of 2024 registered at Police Station ‘A’ Section, Ghotki u/s 364, 302, 147, 148, 149, 427 PPC wherein it is stated   against them that the present applicants have caused the death of the mother of the complainant by way of incident of abduction and burning the deceased in her car.

 

          Learned counsel for the applicants contended that there is delay of Five days in the incident and the reporting in the matter. It is further contended that although it is reported that the relatives of the deceased were present they preferred not to help the deceased at the time of the death by making any attempt to extinguish the fire or to save the deceased. It is further contended that no direct evidence and eye witnesses of the incident is available. It is also contended that the statement of the present applicants/accused have been alleged to have been present by the witnesses and the same amounts to extra judicial confession. It is also contended that the alleged transfer of land took place in the year 2022 and the incident is reported in the year, 2024 there is a huge time lapse. It is also contended that charge has been framed and that NBWs against the complainant have been issued as they are failing to proceed with the matter. It is also contended that the car was acquired after Five days wherein photographs show that the Gas Cylinder is missing on which the Car was being run. He relied upon cases reported in 2021 SCMR 130, 2025 SCMR 318, 2023 SCMR 364, 2020 PCr.LJ Note 89, 2012 SCMR 387, 2016 MLD 862, 2020 MLD 1896, 2020 SCMR 1253, 2010  YLR, 6782017 SCMR 728, 2022, MLD 103, 2007 Cr.LJ 688, 2011 SCMR 161, 2016 SCMR 2046, 2014 SCMR 12842019 SCMR 1923 and 2016 SCMR 18.

 

          Learned counsel for the complainant however, contended that the present applicants have been specifically nominated in the FIR and there is no other enmity except the one stated in the FIR. It is also contended that the 161 Cr.P.C, statements are supporting the case whereas medical evidence is present as to the cause of death. It was lastly contended that deceased herself gave an application nominating the applicants/accused to the concerned Police Station. Learned counsel for the applicants however, contended that no such application is available in the police record. He relied upon cases reported in 2022 SCMR 1168, 2022 MLD 540, 2023 SCMR 975, 2016 YLR 1863, 2008 MLD 1096 and 2006 MLD 691.

 

          Learned Additional Prosecutor General contended that the requirements and ingredients of pre-arrest bail are missing in the present matter.

 

          Having heard the counsels and gone through the record. I have specifically called upon the learned counsel for the applicants as to the applicants requiring to seek the availability before the trial Court for bail to which he preferred to proceed with the pre-arrest bail application. The calling on the learned counsel was made as apparently the pre-requisite grounds of pre-arrest bail application inter alia enmity and ill-will coming from the record is to be shown. Learned counsel for applicants may have a good case for post-arrest bail application but the requirements aforementioned for pre-arrest bail application are apparently found missing. I have preferred not to pass any comments in respect to grounds taken as the same may prejudice the case of parties however, on the aforementioned grounds of failing to meet-up to the requirements of pre-arrest bail application. All these three bail applications are hereby dismissed.

 

          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 applications stands disposed of in the above terms.

 

Office is directed to place a signed copy of this order in captioned connected matters.

 

 

                                                                                      J U D G E

 

 

Ihsan/PS.