IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.2633 of 2025
[ Sadaqat Ali son of Bux Ali versus The State ]
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
orders on office objection as at “A”
For
hearing of bail application
-----------------------------------------------------
18.02.2026
M/s
Qadir Bux alias Waseem Akhtar & Tariq Mehmood, advocates for
applicant/accused
Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar, APG &
Ms. Rukhsana Qassim Mirjat, ADPP
Mr.
Aurangzeb Gorar, advocate for complainant
IO/PI Rana Latif of SIU Saddar,
Karachi
-------------------------------------------
Applicant
Sadaqat son of Bux Ali seeks post arrest bail in FIR No.592/2024, registered at
P.S. Sukhan for offence under section 302, 397, 34, PPC, after rejection of his
bail plea by learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Malir, Karachi vide order
dated 25.03.2025.
Brief
facts as per FIR, are that on 05.11.2024, two unidentified persons committed
robbery from Zikriya Wariyam son of complainant from Road No.10, near Bhains
Colony, Cattle Farm of Ali Murad Shar, Sukhan, Malir, and upon resistance
accused caused firearm injuries to victim Zikriya alias Wariyam, who later
succumbed to his injuries, hence the subject FIR.
Learned
counsel for applicant submits that applicant is not nominated in FIR; that
there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him in the alleged
offence, accept recovery of pistol and CDR, which are very week source of
evidence on which the applicant has been implicated in the alleged offence;
that alleged incident is unseen and there is no independent eyewitnesses; that
there is extra-judicial confession of applicant before police which is
inadmissible, hence his case calls for further inquiry in terms of Section
497(2), Cr.PC.
On
the other hand, learned A.P.G., assisted by counsel for complainant, opposed
for grant of bail on the ground that during investigation, applicant confessed his
involvement in the alleged offence and on his pointation police recovered crime
weapon, the same was sent to FSL, which matched with the crime empties,
recovered from place of incident, which connects him in the commission of
offence; that alleged offence carries capital punishment, which falls within
the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC; that CDR of the
applicant has been collected which shows his presence at the place of incident.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.P.G.,
learned counsel for complainant and perused the material available on record.
Admittedly, complainant is not eyewitness of the
incident and he received call from his brother Dawood on cell phone about
alleged incident, he went to Hospital where he found that his nephew Zakria got
two bullet injuries on his body and he died. During investigation, applicant was
arrested in another robbery case in injured condition in police encounter case and
police interrogated him wherein he disclosed his involvement in the alleged
offence. No doubt, confession before police is inadmissible but on his
pointation crime weapon was recovered and same was sent to FSL and FSL report
is positive. During investigation, police also collected CDR, which shows his
presence at the place of incident at the time of offence. Progress has been
made in trial and statement of complainant was recorded by learned trial Court
in which he fully implicated the applicant in the commission of offence, which
is heinous one and carries capital punishment. From tentative assessment of
material available on record, it appears that sufficient material is available
on record, which connects him in the alleged offence, which comes within the
ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC, therefore, no case of post
arrest bail is made out, therefore, instant criminal bail application is dismissed, with direction to the
learned trial Court to conclude the trial preferably within three months,
without granting adjournment to either party at trial on any flimsy grounds,
under intimation to this Court through learned MIT-II.
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 dismissed.
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS