ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No.1231 of 2022

DATE

ORDER WITH SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs

 

For hearing of bail application

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

04.03.2026

            Mr. Javed Ahmed Chhatari & Ms. Saima, advocates for applicant

            Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G. & Ms. Rukhsana Qassim Mirjat, ADPP

            Mr. Amer Raza Naqvi, advocate for complainant

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

 

            Applicants/accused Syeda Farwa Miraj and Rubina Miraj seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No.232/2022, registered at P.S. Gizri for offence under Section 452, 354, 337-A(i), 34, PPC, after rejection of their bail plea by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Karachi South vide order dated 14.06.2022.

 

2.         It is alleged in FIR that on 21.05.2022 at about 09:30 p.m. applicants entered into the house of complainant and beaten the complainant and her daughter Komal with fists and blows , hence the subject FIR.

 

3.         Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case; that applicants and complainant are neighbours and due to some dispute alleged incident occurred, however, they decided to resolve the issue outside the Court; that alleged offence does not come within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC, hence their case requires further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC.

 

4.         Learned A.P.G., assisted by learned counsel for complainant, has recorded no objection, without prejudice to the case of either party at trial.

 

5.         Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.P.G. learned counsel for complainant and perused the material available on record.

 

6.         Admittedly, alleged offence does not come within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC, and rule in such cases is grant of bail and its refusal is an exception as held by the apex Court in the case of Muhammad Tanveer versus State (PLD 2017 SC 733). Counsel for complainant has recorded no objection for grant of pre-arrest bail. Sufficient grounds are available on record, which make out the case of applicants for further inquiry, therefore, interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants/accused above named by this Court vide order dated 15.06.2022 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

7.         Needless to mention here that observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, the same would not prejudice the case of either party at trial.

8.         Instant criminal bail application is disposed of in the above terms.

 

J U D G E

 

Gulsher/PS