ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S-  174 of 2012.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

01.08.2012.

1. For order on office objection.

2. For hearing.

Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Naimatullah Bhurgri, State counsel.

~~~~

Riazat Ali Sahar, J:       Applicant Ghulam Murtaza son of Ghulam Nabi has been involved in crime No.159/2011 of P.S Thariri Mohabbat, for offence punishable under Section 394 P.P.C.

2.       The relevant facts of the prosecution case are that on 19.11.2011, in the night time the applicant duly armed with shot-gun alongwith co-accused persons appeared at Indus Highway, where they with intention to rob the complainant and his companions, stopped them and on resisting the principal accused Farooque Jamali hit at the wrist of PW Abdul Waheed by kalashnikov, who fell down, then accused persons made their escape good.

3.       It is, inter-alia, contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was arrested on 30.11.2011, and the challan was submitted on 13.12.2011, as such he is no more required for further investigation, no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, the allegation against the applicant is mere presence on the spot, no overt act has been attributed to him and obviously it is very difficult for a person to identify the accused, in such a condition, on the light of vehicle, as the complainant did not point out that whether the complainant party and the accused persons are well known to each other prior to the alleged incident, which requires further enquiry.

4.       The learned State counsel raised no objection in respect of arguments delivered by the learned counsel for the applicant.

5.       I have minutely considered the respective arguments of learned counsel for the applicant, learned State counsel and examined the record.

6.       In-fact no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, the case has been challaned as such the applicant is no more required for further investigation. The identification of the accused persons on the light of vehicle in the darkness of the night by the complainant and especially in the critical situation when they were under fear, requires further enquiry. The case of the present applicant is at different footings to the case of principal accused Farooque Jamali. The applicant is behind the bars for about more than 08 months. The bail cannot be refused to the accused as a punishment.

7.       In view of the above circumstances, I am of the considered view that the applicant has succeeded to make out his case for granting bail. Consequently, the application stands allowed. The applicant is granted bail in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (One hundred thousand), and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 

                                                                        Judge