ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Crl: Bail Application No. S- 725 of 2012

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1- For orders on M.A.No.3224/2013

2- For hearing.

12^th. October, 2015.

Mr. Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro, Advocate along with Applicant.

Mr. Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, Advocate a/w Complainant.

Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, D.P.G for State.

Instant bail application is pending since 2012 for confirmation, whereas, learned Counsel for applicant submits that the applicant is totally innocent who has been falsely implicated in the instant crime merely on the basis of suspicious. Per learned Counsel no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant regarding alleged offence in the F.I.R or in the challan. Per learned Counsel, the applicant is a man of advanced age of infirm health who is by profession school teacher and has no previous criminal history. Per learned Counsel, the applicant inspite of serious ailment as he can hardly move without assistance of stick is regularly attending the trial Court as well as this Court without any default, whereas, according to learned Counsel no material whatsoever has been recovered or produced by the prosecution against the applicant during investigation, which may directly connect the present applicant in the instant crime. According to learned Counsel, one of the main co-accused namely Altaf Hussain Mashori, against whom the complainant has alleged that he has committed murder of his daughter Mst. Salma, the complainant has entered into compromise with him and he has been acquitted by the trial Court in the same crime. Per learned Counsel, no useful purpose will be served if the interim pre-arrest bail granted to present applicant/accused vide order dated 20.9.2012 is recalled at this stage, hence requests that his interim pre-arrest bail may be confirmed on same terms and conditions.

Learned Counsel for complainant could not controvert above facts, however, opposes the confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail granted to the present applicant on the ground that there is specific role of applicant, who accordingly to complainant, kept the custody of alleged abductee, therefore, his bail may not be confirmed.

Learned D.P.G for State after perusing the record, and in view of the above facts and circumstances of case has supported the contention of learned Counsel for applicant/accused and submits that no useful purpose will be served, if interim pre-arrest bail granted to the present applicant/accused is recalled at this stage, as he is a man of advanced age with ailing health and has not been assigned any direct role in the F.I.R or challan.

I have heard the learned Counsel for applicant/accused, complainant as well as D.P.G for State and also perused the record. I am of the tentative view that present applicant has made-out a case of further inquiry, whereas, he is a man of advanced age with ailing health and has not been assigned any direct role either of alleged abduction of Mst.Salma or her subsequent murder, whereas, his involvement is only based on hearsay evidence, however no material whatsoever has been produced by the prosecution, which may directly connect him with the commission of offence. Moreover, no useful purpose will be served to recall the interim pre-arrest bail granted to present applicant/accused at this stage, whereas, the applicant has not misused the concession of interim pre-arrest bail and is no more required for the purpose of further investigation. The main accused Altaf Hussain Mashori has been acquitted in the instant crime through compromise. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to applicant/accused in terms of order dated 20.9.2012 is hereby confirmed on similar terms and conditions. However, the applicant is directed to regularly attend the trial Court.

Bail Application stands disposed of in the above terms along with listed application.

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI