ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD

Criminal Bail Application No.D-39/2010.

DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

1. FOR ORDER ON MA NO.3403/10.

2. FOR HEARING.

14-10-2010.

Mr. Muhammad Hashim Leghari, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. Syed Meeral Shah, D.P.G Sindh for the State.

>>>>><<<<< 

            Through the instant application, applicants seek post arrest bail in crime No.68 of 2010 of PS Digri, for offence under sections 324, 353, 34 PPC R/W/S 6/7 Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.

2.         The applicants approached the trial Court but their bail plea was turned down vide order dated 19-08-2010.

3.         Per prosecution on 07-05-2010 SIP Ghulam Nabi Shah, S.H.O PS Digri along with his subordinate staff was on patrolling duty within the jurisdiction of his Police Station. At about 1615 hours police party reached near National Bank of Pakistan Digri Branch and saw accused Qadir Bux alias Qadro and Dur Muhammad alias Duri who were coming by a motorcycle, required in crime No.67 of 2010 of PS Digri. Police party tried to stop them but suddenly both took out the Pistols from fold of their shalwar and started firing upon police party. However, both the applicants were apprehended along with Pistols.

4.         It is interalia contended that the applicants are innocent and they have nothing to do with the alleged offence. Per learned counsel no such incident had taken place and the prosecution is nothing but cock and bull story. It is urged that none amongst P.Ws has stated in their 161 Cr.P.C statements that they took shelter, and it is very strange that none of them had received any injury. It is further contended that the place of incident is a thickly populated area but no independent person has been cited as a witness. It is urged with vehemence that the provisions of section 6 & 7 of ATA 1997 are badly missing and police has malafidely applied the same sections in order to fix the applicants in a schedule office.

5.         Conversely Mr. Syed Meeral Shah, D.P.G Sindh for the State vehemently opposed the bail plea of the applicants, however, he did not rebut the contention regarding sections 6 & 7 ATA Act,  raised by learned counsel for the applicants.

6.         Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.         Admittedly none amongst P.Ws has received even a scratch and at the most it is case of ineffective firing. Though alleged incident is said to have taken place in the heart of the city but not a single inhabitant of the locality has been cited as witness. So far the applicability of the sections 6 & 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is concerned, the prosecution could not collect any mater connecting the applicants with the above offence. It is settled principle of law that liberty of a citizen is very valuable right and same can not be trifled with, and accused can not be kept behind bars indefinitely under the allegations of heinous offence.

8.         For the foregoing reasons, we are of the considered view that the case of the applicants requires further probe and they deserve the concession of bail. Consequently we admit the applicants on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (one hundred thousands only) each and P.R Bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court.

9.         Bail application along with listed application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

                                                                        JUDGE