IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.263 of 2026
[
Maqbool Ahmed & Others vs The State ]
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of bail application
-----------------------------------------------------
10.02.2026
Mr.
Rashid Mehmood, advocate for applicants
Mr.
Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.
& Ms. Rukhsana Qassim Mirjat, ADPP
PI
Habibullah and ASI Muhammad Qadeer
of PS Steel Town
-------------------------------------------
Applicant/accused
Zulfiqar Ali son of Choudhry
Bashir Ahmed seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No.92/202, registered at P.S. Steel
Town, for offence under Sections 506-B, 337H(ii), 337A(i), 34, PPC.
It is
alleged in the FIR that complainant is a practicing advocates and pursuing the
cases against the applicant/accused, on which several times hot words were
exchanged between the complainant and applicant. On 25.01.2026,
applicant/accused called the complainant to settle the issues at Gulistan-e-Faisal where applicant/accused along with his
companions attached on complainant and his friends and pointed pistol at them
in which friend of complainant Mansoor Sahito sustained injuries at his right hand, hence the
subject FIR.
Learned
counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in this case; that complainant is a practicing advocate and has
managed this false FIR against the applicant; he has directly approached this
case by way of instant criminal bail application on the ground that he is
facing threats of humiliation and disgrace at the hands of complainant, who is
a practicing advocate has very close relations with other lawyers; there is no
medical evidence and ocular version as stated in FIR requires further inquiry.
Notice
issued to the complainant is returned served but he is called absent, without
any intimation.
On the
other hand, learned A.P.G. opposed for grant of bail on the ground that
applicant is nominated in the FIR and specific role has been assigned to him.
Heard learned
counsel for applicant, learned APG and have gone through the material available
on record.
This
Court has concurrent jurisdiction to entertain pre-arrest bail directly in
exceptional circumstances. In the present case, complainant is a practicing advocate
and has very close relations with the legal fraternity and the applicant is
facing threat of humiliation and disgrace at the hands of complainant party
upon his approaching the concerned Court for pre-arrest bail. From tentative
assessment of the material available on record, it appears that all the
sections applied in the FIR are bailable, except
section 506/2, PPC, which too does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory
clause of Section 497, Cr.PC, hence the case of the
applicant calls for further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC; that 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); Therefore, interim
pre-arrest bail granted to applicant above named by this Court vide order dated
27.01.2026 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions. He is directed to
join investigation/trial forthwith.
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