IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Crl: Bail Application No.S- 773 of 2012.

FOR HEARING

Applicant: Mir Hassan, through Mr.Ali Gul Abbassi,

Advocate.

Respondent: The State, through Mr.Sardar Ali Shah, APG.

Date of hearing, 05th. November, 2012.

O R D E R

SALLAHUDDIN PANHWAR, J:- Applicant/accused Mir Hassan Korai seeks post-arrest bail in Crime No. 16 of 2009 of Police Station, Sadhuja for offences punishable Under sections 302, 506/2, 148, 149 PPC.

02. Briefly, the relevant facts are that the applicant/accused armed with Kalashnikov along with his companions Imdad, Sijawal, Mir Hassan, Akber and others was present at the place of vardat, while accused Imdad Bullo caused straight fire shot upon Ghulam Abbass, remaining accused persons issued threats to the complainant and witnesses, thereafter the complainant and other P.Ws saw that injured Ghulam Abbass succumbed to the injuries.

03. Counsel for the applicant/accused has inter-alia contended that no specific role is assigned to the applicant except his presence at the time of incident; it is not evident that applicant has facilitated the main accused for causing murder of deceased; the applicant is behind the bar and question of vicarious liability can be decided by the trial court at the time of recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

04. Mr.Syed Sardar Ali Shah learned A.P.G for the State did not controvert the grounds raised by applicant’s counsel and conceded to the grant of bail.

05. Heard counsels and Perused the record.

06. Admittedly, the allegations against the applicant/accused are that the applicant armed with Kalashnikov, was present at the place of vardat along with other co-accused persons while co-accused Imdad Bullo, caused straight fire upon deceased Ghulam Abbass; no overt act is attributed to the applicant/accused, therefore, in the instant case question of common intention requires further probe. Moreover, on the ground of absconsion, bail cannot be declined, if, otherwise the applicant/accused has succeeded to make-out a case under sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Reliance can be made to the case of Mitho Pitafi Vs. The State reported in 2009 S C M R 299.aplicant is behind the bar no more required for further investigation; case is pending for adjudication of his guilt.

07. Keeping in view the above given circumstances applicant has succeeded to make out his case within scope of further inquiry, thus applicant is entitled for after arrest bail

08. These are the detailed reason of my short order dated 05.11.2012.however observation made therein is in tentative nature and will not effect the merits of the case.

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI