IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.3354 of 2025
[ Muhammad Faizan
& Another vs The State ]
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
1.
For orders on office objection as at
“A”
2.
For orders on M.A. No.17789/2025
3. For
hearing of bail application
-----------------------------------------------------
09.02.2026
Mr.
Altaf Hussain, advocate for applicants
Mr.
Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G. & Ms. Rukhsana Qassim Mirjat, ADPP SIP/IO
Sikandar Hayat
-------------------------------------------
Applicant
No.2 Muhammad Yaseen is present on interim pre-arrest bail, whereas applicant
No.1 Muhammad Faizan was also admitted on pre-arrest bail vide order dated
15.12.2025 but the learned counsel for applicant requests for condonation of
absence of applicant Muhammad Faizan on the ground that he is suffering from
cancer and unable to attend the Court due to his critical condition; absence of
applicant Muhammad Faizan is condoned.
2. It is
alleged in FIR that on 13.11.2025 at 10:30 am complainant is a practicing
advocate was present in Malir Court premises when accused persons namely, Sass
Nawaz, Nasir Brohi, Muhammad Ayub and other unknown persons attacked upon him
with bricks and sticks on his hands and head and caused injuries to him;
accused Faizan fired upon him with pistol. Advocates gathered there and saved
him, they caught one person whereas others escaped away.
3. Counsel
for applicant submits that all Sections of FIR are bailable, except Sections 3
and 4 of the Lawyer Protection Act and complainant who is a practicing advocate
is not appearing in Court; that in cases where alleged offence does not come within the ambit of
prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC, the bail is a rule and its refusal is
an exception, hence he prays for grant of bail to applicants.
4. Heard learned
counsel for applicants, learned APG and have gone through the material
available on record.
5. All the sections mentioned in FIR are
bailable, except Sections 3 and 4 of the Lawyer Protection Act, which does not
fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC; SIP Sikandar
Hayyat, IO of the case present in Court states that during alleged incident
complainant party caught hold one of the accused and his custody was handed
over to him but he released him on the basis of statement of complainant
whereby he stated that the said accused has patched up with the complainant and
is not required. In view of such statement said accused was not produced before
the Magistrate. Learned for applicant submits that the complainant of this case
is a practicing advocate and he is not appearing before the learned trial Court
to pursue his case. It is settled proposition of law that no purpose would be
served out to decline their pre-arrest bail merely on technicalities and in
case of pre-arrest bail, merits cannot be considered as held by the Supreme
Court of Pakistan in the cases of Muhammad Ramzan versus Zafrullah (1986 SCMR 1380) and Muhammad
Ijaz versus The State (2022 SCMR 1271);
that in the cases where the alleged offence does not come within the ambit of prohibitory clause of
Section 497, Cr.PC the bail is a rule and its refusal is an exception, as held by apex Court in the case of Muhammad Tanveer
versus State (PLD 2017 SC 733). Moreover, merits of the
case cannot be considered in pre-arrest bail as held by the Supreme Court of
Pakistan in the cases
of Muhammad Ramzan versus Zafrullah (1986 SCMR 1380) and Muhammad Ijaz versus
The State (2022 SCMR 1271). Therefore, interim pre-arrest bail granted to the
applicants/accused above named by this Court vide order dated 15.12.2025 is
confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
The observations made
herein above are tentative in nature, the same would not prejudice the case of
either party at trial.
The instant
criminal bail application is accordingly disposed
of.
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS