ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.126 of 2026

DATE

ORDER WITH SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs

 

1.      For orders on M.A. No.2156/2026 (U/A)

2.      For orders on office objection a/w reply as at “A”

3.      For orders on M.A. No.2157/2026 (Exp/A)

4.      For hearing of main case

-----------------------------------------------------

17.02.2026

 

Mr. Akhtar Ali Memon, advocate for applicant

-------------------------------------

                       

            Applicant Zakir Hussain Pirzada, advocate, who is complainant of FIR No.135/2025, registered at P.S. Risala, Karachi for offence under Section 324, 34, PPC, has impugned the order dated 17.01.2026, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, South, Judicial Complex, Jail Road, Karachi whereby respondents Ghulam Mustafa, Deedar Ali, Asif and Saleem were admitted on bail.

 

            Brief facts of the case are that applicant, who is a practicing advocate, was available at the scene of offence when respondents/accused attempted to commit his murder but surprisingly he remained safe. Hence the subject FIR.

 

            Heard learned counsel for applicant and perused the material available on record.

 

            This is a case of ineffective firing and apparently there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order, which has been passed by concerned Court in accordance with law. Learned counsel for applicant is directed to satisfy the Court about the cancellation of bail on the ground that Supreme Court of Pakistan had settled the principles for grant of bail and its cancellation, which are entirely different. Learned counsel for applicant submits that he was condemned unheard by learned trial Court despite the fact that he moved application for adjournment on 23.12.2025.

 

            It is settled proposition that Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Rab Nawaz versus Shahzad Hassan (2025 SCMR 1357) and Chairman, NAB versus Yar Muhammad Solangi (2023 SCMR 1357), has settled down the principles for cancellation of bail and the case of applicant does not come within the ambit of such settled principles. No case of cancellation of bail granted to the respondents/accused vide the order impugned herein is made out, therefore, instant criminal bail application is dismissed in limine along with listed applications.

 

                                                                                                            J U D G E

Gulsher/PS