ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal
Bail Application No.3565 of 2025
[ Manthar son of
Haji Khan Chandio versus The State ]
Criminal
Bail Application No.3224 of 2025
[ Muhammad Asif son of Mubarak
versus The State ]
DATE
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(S)
For hearing of bail applications
-----------------------------
12.03.2026
Mr.
Bahadur Shah, advocate for applicant in B.A.
3563/2025
Mr.
Wajahat Ali, advocate for applicant in B. A.
No.3224/2025
M/s
Muntazir Mehdi, Acting Prosecutor General Sindh and Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.
Mr.
Zahiruddin Mujahid,
advocate for complainant
Additional
Inspector General of Police Sindh Azan Khan, SP Investigation Muhammad Usman Sadozai, SP Abdul Baqi Rind of Shorab Goth and
IO/PI Muhammad Hassan of PS Sachal
---------------------------------------------------
Shamsuddin Abbasi, J.-- Applicants/accused Manthar son of Haji Khan Chandio and Muhammad Asif son of Mubarak seek post arrest bail in FIR No.1596
of 2025, registered at P.S. Sachal for offence under
Sections 395, PPC, after dismissal of his bail plea by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VIII, Malir vide orders dated
27.11.2025.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as
narrated in the FIR by the complainant are that her sister came and disclosed
that her husband, Muhammad Ashfaq had travelled
abroad for some work; on 25.09.2025 at about 3:30 a.m., she and her children
were alone in house when six persons dressed in shalwar
Kameez, two of whom were wearing Sindhi caps, entered
in her house and confined the inmates of house and forcibly robbed
approximately 20 tolas gold, cash amount Rs.6,000,000/-
(Rupees six million), prize bonds worth Rs.500,000, snatched mobile phone of chowkidar Asif, containing SIM
No.0305-9833824. They held children hostage for about one hour, intimidated
them, extended threats of murder and later escape away. Upon receipt of
information, police mobile arrived at spot, Crime Scene Unit also reached there.
Hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned Advocate for applicant mainly
contended that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in
this case due mala fide intentions and ulterior motives; that applicants are not
nominated in the FIR; that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the
applicants/accused; that there is no independent material available on record
to connect the applicants/accused with the alleged offence; that no overt act
has been attributed to the applicants/accused; that allegation of abetment is
general in nature and there is no direction evidence to connect them with the
alleged offence; the investigation has been finalized and no
physical custody of the applicants/accused is required by the police; that alleged
offence does not come with the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC; thereby making it
a matter in which grant of bail is a rule and refusal an exception; that
learned trial Court has already granted bail to the co-accused and the present
applicants/accused are also entitled for same relief.
4. On the other hand, learned A.P.G., assisted by
learned counsel for complainant, submitted that applicants/accused are members of
a gang involved in several of FIRs of like nature; that there is no delay in registration
of FIR, as such, there is a sufficient material available on the record to
connect the applicants with the commission of the alleged offense; that
complainant has moved application for cancellation of bail granted to
co-accused Darya Khan, which is pending before this Court and will move
application for cancellation of bail of other co-accused. He prayed for
dismissal of instant pre-arrest bail application.
5. Heard
learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on
record.
6. No
doubt the FIR was registered against the unknown persons, however, during
investigation it has come on record that applicant Manthar
is driver whereas applicant/accused Asif is security
guard at an under construction building, adjacent to the house where alleged
offence has been committed. In the instant case complainant’s sister has lost
20 tolas gold, Rs.6Million cash, prize bonds of Rs.500,000/-. During proceedings, it has come on surface that IO
is compromised with accused and he might be mixed up with the accused persons
and has not properly investigated the instant case, as such, Additional
Inspector General of Police Sindh was called to appear in person. Today, Mr.
Azad Khan, Additional Inspector General of Police Sindh is present, who admits
that this case was not investigated properly by the present IO, therefore, he
will conduct inquiry against IO and he has issued explanation to SP
Investigation East, Karachi for poor performance in investigation and
constituted JIT for recovery and arrest of absconders and sought time. In the
present case, PWs implicated them in their statements under Section 161, Cr.PC. Co-accused had confined PWs and children on gunpoint
and alleged offence comes within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section
497, Cr.PC. So far as the contention of learned
counsel for applicants/accused that co-accused have been granted bail by the
learned trial Court is concerned, learned counsel for complainant submits that
he has already filed application for cancellation of bail granted to the
co-accused, therefore, I refrain myself to give any finding on the bail
granting order to co-accused Darya Khan and others. There is no mala fide on
the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the applicant/accused hence, the applicants are not entitled for bail.
Accordingly, instant criminal bail applications are dismissed. However, learned trial Court is directed to decide the
case of the applicants/accused as early as possible, in accordance with law.
7. Needless to mention
here that the observations made herein-above are tentative and would not
influence the trial Court while deciding the case of applicants on merits.
8. Instant criminal
bail applications are disposed of in the above terms.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS