ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

Cr. Bail Appln.  No:  S- 488 of 2012.

Date                          Order with signature of judge.

1. For orders on office objection as flag A.

2. For  Hearing.                                         

27.11.2012.

Mr. Muhammad Azim Korai, advocate  alongwith the applicants.

Miss Shazia Surahio, State Counsel

========

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO,J.:- Applicants/accused seek pre arrest bail in Crime No.101/2012 registered at  B-Section Kandhkot  under sections 337-A(i), F(i), 147, 148, 114, 504, 506/2 PPC.

                        Brief facts of the prosecution case  as disclosed in the FIR are that on 18.08.2012 at 12.00 noon accused  Pahalwan , 2. Manik boths sons of Mohammad Ismail alias Thikar 3.Adam, 4. Zulfiqar Ali, 5.Ali Nawaz all three  sons of Pahalwan   all bycaste Bajkani, 6.Aijaz, 7.Papu, 8.Sadam Hussain all three sons  of  Shahmir Gujrani  R/O Dabhani, all armed with lathies  came at Mai Masjid  road where his uncle  Sabir Hussain, cousin Abdullah and Habibullah were standing. At that time it is alleged that accused Pahalwan  instigated the  co-accused and at his instigation  accused Manik caused lathi blow to complainant which hit him  at right side of his head, accused Adam caused lathi blow  to complainant which hit him at his back,  accused  Aijaz Gujrani caused lathi blow to Sabir  Hussain which hit him at the left side of his head, accused Papu and Zulfiqar caused lathi blows to Sabir Hussain, accused Sadam Hussain caused lathi blow to Habibullah which hit him on left eyebrow, accused Ali Nawaz and Sadam Hussain  caused lathi blows to Habibullah, accused Pahalwan  caused lathi blows to Abdullah which hit him on the left side of his nose.  Complainant party raised cries which attracted to the persons of the locality and accused persons went away while abusing to complainant party but the complainant party succeeded  to apprehend accused Pahalwan  on the spot alongwith lathi.  Thereafter, complainant, took injured persons to the police station and complaint lodged report against the accused persons to the above effect.  It was recorded under the above referred sections.  Police after usual investigation submitted challan against accused U/S 512 Cr.P.C.  Applicants/ accused applied for pre arrest bail before learned Sessions Judge, Kashmore at Kandhkot.  Bail application moved on behalf of the applicants/accused was rejected by Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot vide order dated 02.10.2012, thereafter, applicants/ accused approached this Court. 

                        Mr. Mohammad Azeem Korai, learned advocate for the applicants/accused mainly contended that there is dispute between the parties. Applicants are brothers interse and they have been falsely implicated by the complainant due to enmity.   He has further contended  that present applicants/accused are students, in case they are remanded  to jail, their career will be ruined.  He further submitted that alleged offence does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.  Applicants are no more required for investigation, challan has already been submitted.   In support of  his submissions,  learned counsel for the applicants/ accused  relied upon case of Adrees Ahmad  and others v. Zafar Ali and another (2010 SCMR 64).

                        Miss Shazia Surahio, State Counsel  vehemently opposed the  grant of bail mainly on the ground that   the applicants/accused had caused injuries to complainant party and they have been specifically named in the FIR. Applicants/accused were absconders in challan.

                        I am inclined to confirm interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused for the reasons that all applicants/accused are brothers interse. It has been argued that all applicants/accused are students, in case they are remanded to jail, their study will suffer.  Humiliation and unjustified harassment would be caused to applicants/accused. Alleged offences do not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.  In such cases grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception.  Enmity is admitted in F.I.R. Case has already been challaned and no useful purpose will be served by remanding applicants/accused to jail on technical grounds.  A large number of accused persons have been involved in this case. Prima facie, a false implication of applicants/ accused can not be ruled out in this case.  Malafide is apparent on record.  Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to peculiar circumstances of case. Abscondence of applicants/ accused  was for a short period, mere abscondence for a short period would not be sufficient to disentitle applicants/accused from concession of bail because even otherwise applicants are entitled for bail.

                        Keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case, ingredients of pre arrest bail are satisfied therefore, interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

                        Needless to observe that above observations are tentative in nature and will not influence the trial Court in any manner while deciding the case.

JUDGE

                        After usual investigation, challan was submitted against accused persons under sections 337-A(i), F(i), 147, 148, 114, 504, 506/2 PPC, present applicants/accused were shown as absconders.  Names of co-accused Manik Khan, Adam Khan, Zulfiqar Ali  and Ali Nawaz  were  placed in column No.II of the challan.