ORDER
SHEET
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.477 of 2026
Criminal Bail Application No.223 of 2026
DATE
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(S)
For
hearing of bail applications
-----------------------------
06.03.2026
Mr. Imran
Khadim, advocate for applicant in Cr. B.A. No.477/2026
Mr. Abdul
Baqi Lone & Ms. Saima Khalique, advocate in Cr.B.A.223/2026
Mr.
Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.
IO/PI
Abdul Majid and SIP Muhammad Javed of PS Zaman Town
------------------------------------------------ =
Shamsuddin
Abbasi, J.-- Applicants/accused
Aajid Hussain son of Sabir Hussain and Mst. Saira Tufail daughter of Tufail
Ahmed seek post arrest bail in FIR No.1274/2025, registered at P.S. Zaman Town,
Karachi for offence under Sections 324, 109, 34, 302, PPC, after dismissal of
their bail plea by learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Karachi East vide
order dated 08.01.2026.
2. Brief
facts of the prosecution case are that on 07.11.2025 at about 2130 hours at
Bachao Band, Bhittai Colony, Korangi Crossing, Karachi complainant Hamza Tufail
sustained firearm injuries at right side of his abdomen, when accused Fahad
accompanied by an unknown person, fired upon him. It is alleged in the FIR that
accused Aajid approached the complainant and informed him that accused Fahad
intended to return the medical expenses incurred on account of injuries
suffered earlier. On this pretext, accused Aajid brought the complainant to the
place of occurrence, where the incident took place. After occurrence,
injured-complainant was shifted to hospital by accused Aajid where he later
expired. Investigation Officer recorded statement of injured Hamza Tufail and
the same was incorporated in the FIR book, in which he has fully implicated the
applicants/accused. During investigation, applicants/accused were arrested and
after conclusion of investigation challan was submitted by the Investigation
Officer against the applicants under Sections 324, 109, 34, 302, PPC in which co-accused
Fahad and his companion were shown as absconders and after death of complainant
Section 302, PPC was inserted in the challan sheet.
3. Learned
Advocate for applicants/accused mainly contended that applicants/accused are
innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case due mala fide
intentions and ulterior motives; that the applicants/accused have been arrested
on suspicion disclosed by injured complainant in his statement under section
154, Cr.PC; that there was a delay of 15
hours in lodging of F.I.R for which no plausible explanation has been furnished;
that there is no iota of evidence to connect the applicants/accused with the
commission of alleged offence. Lastly it is submitted that the alleged offence call
for further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC.
4. Learned
A.P.G., assisted by complainant in person, argued that the applicant/accused
has been specifically named in the F.I.R with specific role of hatching
conspiracy for causing murder of injured complainant; ocular evidence is
corroborated by medical evidence. It is further submitted that the element of
mala fide which is basic requirement for grant of bail is missing in this case.
So far the delay in lodging of F.I.R is concerned, it is submitted that it has been
sufficiently explained by the complainant. Learned A.P.G. has opposed an application
for post arrest bail to the applicants.
5. I
have carefully heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
6. Admittedly,
the injured complainant in his 154, Cr.PC statement has specifically implicated
the present applicants/accused, Mst. Saira Tufail, who is his real sister,
Aajid Hussain, who is his friend and co-accused Fahad is friend of accused
Aajid Hussain. It is the case of the prosecution that complainant was brought
in injured condition to Indus Hospital where his statement was recorded by
police and same was incorporated in Book under Section 154, Cr.PC.
Complainant/deceased nominated present applicants in his statement by stating
therein that his sister Saira Tufail in collusion with Aajid Hussain and his
friend Fahad hatched conspiracy and accused Aajid Hussain brought him to the
place of incident where absconder accused Fahad and one unknown person caused
firearm injury to him. In such a situation, statement of complainant is treated
as dying declaration as held by Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Muhammad
Saeed versus the State (2023 SCMR 1421). No mala fide or ill will has been
established against the deceased for false implication before dying. The alleged
offence is heinous one and carries capital punishment and comes within the
ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC. Moreover, both the
applicants confessed their guilt before police. No doubt extra-judicial
confession is not admissible but Article
40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 says that the
discovery of any fact on the information of the accused in custody of Police is
admissible. Article 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 reads as under:-
"40. How much of information received from accused may be proved.
When any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information
received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a
police-officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession
or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be
proved."
A perusal of above Article
reveals firstly that it serves as a proviso to Articles 38 and 39 of the Order.
Secondly, it is founded on the principle that if the statement or information
of the accused amounts to confession or otherwise is supported by the discovery
of a fact it may be presumed to be true and not to have been extracted. It
comes into operation only (i) if and when certain facts are deposed to as
discovered in consequences of information received from an accused person in
police custody; and (ii) if the information relates distinctly to the fact
discovered.
7.
Applicants/accused have not been able to make
out a case for grant of extraordinary relief of post arrest bail. Apparently, ocular
evidence is corroborated by the medical evidence. Deeper appreciation of
evidence / material is not permissible at bail stage, at this stage only
tentative assessment of material is to be made. Prima facie, there appear
reasonable grounds for believing that applicants have committed the alleged
offence. Therefore, no case for grant of post arrest bail to the applicants is
made out. As such, applicants are not entitled for grant of post arrest bail.
Resultantly, instant bail application is dismissed
8. Needless
to mention that observation made hereinabove are tentative in nature. Trial
Court shall not be influenced while deciding the case on merits.
9. The
instant criminal bail application is disposed of in the above terms.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS