ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

                                                 Cr.Bail.Appl.No.S-  813   of  2014

DATE        ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

04.12.2014.

Mr. Mian Taj Muhammad Keerio, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. Shahid Shaikh, A.P.G. for the State a/w SIP Muhammad Hayat.

                                    =

SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, J:  Through instant application, applicants seek post arrest bail in Crime No.16/2013 registered at Police Station Taluka District Umerkot u/s 364, 302,34 PPC.

2.         Precisely relevant facts as per prosecution case are that applicants / accused in furtherance of their common intention forcibly kidnapped Mevo, brother of complainant and committed his murder by causing kicks, fists and lathi blows to him.

3.         I have heard learned counsel for applicants / accused, learned D.P.G. for the State and have gone through the material available on record.

4.         From the perusal of material available on record, it reveals that version of complainant is supported by statements of PWs recorded in the present crime as well as postmortem report, therefore, prima facie sufficient material has been collected by the I.O. against the present applicants. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants / accused has mainly emphasized upon the two version of same incident but the second version of the same incident is not supported by the statements of independent witnesses of the locality recorded during investigation of second FIR. Even the independent witnesses supported the version of first FIR, therefore, the I.O recommended to dispose of the second FIR as ‘C’ class. Moreover, applicants / accused are nominated in the present FIR as well as in the second FIR therefore, disposal of the second FIR under C class, even, does not advance the case of the applicants / accused nor could be taken as of any impact upon the merits of this case crime. Even otherwise, alleged offence is punishable upto death or imprisonment for life and falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497 (1) Cr.P.C hence applicants / accused cannot claim bail in such like case unless they, prima facie, bring their case within meaning of Subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.PC which they failed hence not entitled for their release.

5.         Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants has relied upon 2010 YLR 1156 Lahore and 2002 YLR 91 Karachi but the facts and circumstances of the said case laws are different, therefore, the same are not applicable in present case.

6.         In view of above facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that applicants have not made out a case for bail after arrest, therefore, their bail application is hereby dismissed.

7.         The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and shall not prejudice the case of either party at trial.

            Above are the reasons of my short order dated. 04.12.2014, whereby instant bail application was dismissed.

                                                                                                                  JUDGE

Tufail