ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Crl. Bail Appln. No.S-567 of 2013
|
DATE OF HEARING |
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE. |
07.4.2014.
For hearing.
Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Imtiaz Ali Jalbani, Asst. Prosecutor General.
Mr. Akeel Ahmed A. Bhutto, advocate for the complainant.
O R D E R.
Naimatullah Phulpoto, J.- Applicant/accused Abdul Hayee Rind seeks post arrest bail in crime No.120/2013, registered at Police Station Civil Line, Larkana, under Sections 364, 337J, 109, 148, 149, PPC.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed by complainant Mst. Kousar Parveen in F.I.R are that she owns a plot situated in Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi. Before the registration of the F.I.R, one Musrat Hussain, brother of Aziz Hussain alias Major Isran, was murdered, in which brother of complainant, namely, Shahid was nominated and he is in the jail in the said murder case. Thereafter, it is alleged that Aziz Hussain was pressurizing the complainant to give the said plot to him else complainant party would face the consequences. It is alleged in the F.I.R that sister of complainant, namely, Sarwat alias Pappi had power of attorney of the same plot. On 12.10.2013 the sisters of the complainant, namely, Taswar alias Nooni and Sarwat alias Pappi came from Karachi to applicant/accused Abdul Hayee and stayed in his house situated at Hyderi Mohalla, Larkana as guests. Complainant was on contact with sisters on the phone. On 15.10.2013, communication of the sisters was disconnected with the complainant and applicant Abdul Hayee was also not attending her calls. Thereafter, it is alleged that complainant during late hours of the night arrived came in the house of Abdul Hayee, where applicant Abdul Hayee and his sister Mst. Fatima and Mst. Zakia were present. Complainant inquired them about her sisters, namely, Taswar and Sarwat. They exchanged hot words with the complainant and replied that both ladies were not with them. Complainant went to the village and narrated the facts to Ali Dino and Rasool Bux. They told to the complainant that on 15.10.2013, they had gone to the Larkana with some work, when they reached in front of the house of applicant Abdul Hayee, it was 3.00 p.m., they saw applicant Abdul Hayee, his mother Mst. Zakia and sister Fatima, Aziz Hussain alias Major and two unidentified persons, they were removing Mst. Taswar alias Nooni and Mst. Sarwat alias Pappi from the house, both were unconscious. Both ladies were made to sit on the rear seat of white coloured car. After that, Abdul Hayee, his mother Zakia and sister Fatima went back to the home. After receiving such information, complainant went to applicant Abdul Hayee and demanded return of the sisters. He refused and stated that he has given his sisters to Aziz Hussain alias Major Isran and he was unable to return them back. Complainant went to the police station and lodged such report. It is alleged that applicant Abdul Hayee and others abducted her sisters in order that such ladies may be murdered over the dispute of the land. F.I.R was recorded vide crime No.120/2013 on 16.10.2013, at 1500 hours, under Sections 364, 337J, 109, 148, 149, PPC.
3. After usual investigation challan was submitted against accused Abdul Hayee. Mst.Fatima and Mst. Zakia. Accused Aziz Hussain alias Major was shown as absconder. Accused Iqbal, Jibran and Altaf were placed in column No.2 of the challan.
4. Bail application was moved on behalf of the applicant/accused before the trial Court. The same was rejected by learned III-Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana by order dated 27.11.2013.
5. Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, learned advocate for the applicant/accused Abdul Hayee, contended that there is last seen evidence against the applicant/accused and murder case of ladies has been registered against some other accused persons in F.I.R No.35/2013, under Sections 302, 148, 149, 337-H(2), PPC, at Police Station Rasheed Wagan. He has submitted that co-accused Mst. Zakia and Mst. Fatima alias Babli have been granted bail by the trial Court and case of applicant/accused is identical. Lastly, it is contended that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of applicant/accused during investigation. In support of the contentions reliance has been placed upon the cases reported as Raees alias Pinjo Khan v. The State, (2007 Y L R 554) and Haroon Shah v. The State, (2011 P. Cr. L.J 210).
6. Mr. Imtiaz Ali Jalbani, learned A.P.G., assisted by Mr. Akeel Ahmed Bhutto, advocate for the complainant, argued that applicant/accused, has been named in the F.I.R with specific role and by the act of the applicant/accused two young ladies were murdered. Such F.I.R was registered vide crime No.35/2013 at Police Station Rasheed Wagan. He has argued that eye-witnesses Ali Dino and Rasool Bux have fully implicated the applicant/accused in their 161, Cr.P.C statements. He has strongly opposed the application.
7. From the perusal of the F.I.R and 161 Cr.P.C statements of P.Ws, it transpires that applicant/accused has been named in the F.I.R with specific role that he had removed both ladies (now deceased) from his house in a car. Such incident was witnessed by P.Ws Ali Dino and Rasool Bux. Thereafter, both ladies were subsequently murdered and such F.I.R bearing crime No.35/2013 was lodged on the same day viz., 16.10.2013 at 2200 hours, at Police Station Rasheed Wagan, under Sections 302, 148, 149, 337-H(2), PPC. P.Ws Ali Dino and Rasool Bux in their 161, Cr.P.C statements have fully implicated the applicant/accused in the commission of the offence. There is no legal force in the contention of learned Counsel for the applicant/accused that case of applicant Abdul Hayee is identical to the case of co-accused Mst.Zakia and Mst. Ghulam Fatima alias Babli, who have been granted bail by trial Court, for the reasons that both deceased stayed in the house of the applicant/accused Abdul Hayee, who switched off his phone when the complainant contacted him and played vital role in the incident. Prima facie, there are reasonable grounds for believing that applicant/accused has committed offence, which falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. No case for bail to applicant/accused is made out. Above-cited authorities are quite distinguishable from the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Bail application is without merit. The same is dismissed.
8. Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature. The trial Court shall not be influenced by such observations while deciding the case on merits.
JUDGE
Qazi Tahir/*