ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No.D-62 of 2013

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE.

01.04.2014.

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For hearing.

Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, advocate for the applicant/accused.

Mr. Imtiaz Ali Jalbani, Assistant Prosecutor General.

O R D E R.

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Applicant / accused Muhammad Qasim Dahani seeks post arrest bail in crime No.17/2013, registered at Police Station Sijawal on 22.4.2013, under Sections 301, 311, 34, PPC, Sections 3 & 4 of the Explosive Act, 1908 and Sections 6 & 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the F.I.R are that on 22.4.2013 SIP Abdul Khaliq Bozdar, SHO of Police Station Sijawal, left police station alongwith his subordinate staff, namely, HCs Ghulam Hussain, Deedar Ali, HC Ghous Bux and PCs Nek Muhammad and Abdul Hafeez, in a government vehicle for patrolling duty vide roznamcha entry No.4 dated 22.4.2013, at 0830 hours. When the police party reached at Bhand Chowk, SHO received information about a blast in village Belo Khan Dahani. On receipt of such information, police party proceeded to the pointed place and reached at the house of present accused. It was 11.30 a.m. SHO was informed that there was a blast in the house of applicant/accused at 0800 hours. SHO found dead bodies of three children of the applicant/accused lying in the house. Two ladies were also lying seriously injured, their names were disclosed as Mst. Qaz Bano, daughter of applicant/accused Muhammad Qasim and Mst. Dadul wife of applicant/accused. They had received injuries at various parts of their bodies. Bomb Disposal Squad was also called. The persons who succumbed to the injuries in the incident were Muhammad Ali, Shah Nawaz and Mst. Lal Bano. It is alleged that applicant/accused after incident succeeded in running away from his house. Bomb Disposal Squad visited place of occurrence and opined that it was the blast of country-made bomb and its weight was 2½ pounds with highly explosive substance. It is further alleged that explosive substance was kept by applicant/accused in his house for using the same for terrorism purpose. Thus such bomb was exploded as it came in the hands of the children of the applicant/accused. SHO dispatched the dead bodies to the hospital. In the end of F.I.R, it is alleged that applicant/accused intended to use the explosive substance on account of the enmity with the persons of his community. F.I.R was lodged on behalf of the State under the above-referred sections.

3. During investigation, 161, Cr.P.C statements of the P.Ws were recorded. Applicant/accused was arrested and on the conclusion of the investigation challan was submitted against the applicant/accused in the Anti-Terrorism Court, Larkana under Sections 301, 311, 34, PPC, Sections 3, 4 of the Explosive Act, 1908 and 6 & 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.

4. Bail application was moved on behalf of the applicant/accused Muhammad Qasim before the trial Court. The same was rejected vide order dated 14.10.2013. Thereafter, applicant has approached this Court.

5. Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, learned advocate for the applicant/accused, contended that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity with the complainant. There is delay of 06 hours in lodging of the F.I.R. Incident was unwitnessed. Lastly, it is contended that explosive substance was thrown by the enemies of the applicant/accused in his house and it is submitted that applicant/accused has committed no offence, rather he is victim of incident.

6. Mr. Imtiaz Ali Jalbani, learned Asst. Prosecutor General, argued that there was a blast in the house of applicant/accused; explosive substance was kept by the applicant/accused in house to use for terrorism. Dead bodies and injured persons were found in the house of the applicant/accused and the alleged offence is serious in nature. He has strongly opposed the application.

7. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties we have perused the relevant record.

8. It is mentioned in the F.I.R that there was a blast in the house of the applicant/accused which resulted casualties. Three family members of the applicant/accused lost their lives and two were injured. No plausible explanation has been furnished by the applicant/accused for keeping the explosive substance of high potency in his house. The contention of learned defence Counsel that explosive substance was hurled by some enemy to the house of the applicant/accused requires deeper appreciation, which is sole function of the trial Court. Deeper appreciation of evidence at bail stage is not permissible under the law. Delay per se in lodging F.I.R in such heinous offence would not be fatal to the case of prosecution. Besides, from the house of the applicant/accused, police has collected sufficient incriminating material to connect the applicant/accused in the commission of the offence. Prima facie, there are reasonable grounds for believing that applicant/accused has committed the alleged offence, which requires speedy trial as provided under the provisions of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. Thus, in our view, no case for bail is made out, therefore, bail application is dismissed.

9. Needless to mention that observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature. The trial Court shall not be influenced by such observations while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits.

Sd/- JUDGE

Qazi Tahir/*