IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.
Crl:
Bail Application No.D- 554 of 2015.
DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF
HON’BLE JUDGE
Present:-
Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi &
Mr. Justice Ghulam Qadir Leghari, JJ.
FOR
HEARING
19th. February, 2016.
M/s
Aftab Hussain Shar & Nadeem Ahmed Malik, Advocates for Applicant/accused.
Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, D.P.G for State.
O
R D E R
It is, inter-alia,
contended by the learned Counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent who
has been falsely implicated in Crime No.96 of 2014 registered under Sections
393, 324, 353 PPC & 7-Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 & 23(i) (a) Arms
Ordinance, at Police Station, Kot Digi by the police of fake encounter,
whereas, applicant along with other co-accused persons who were illegally
arrested by the police from their house and thereafter have been shown in the
instant crime on the allegation of police encounter. Per learned Counsel a
petition was also filed before the Sessions Judge regarding their abduction, however,
in order to cover-up their illegal arrest, the applicant has been shown in the
aforesaid F.I.R. It is further contended by the learned Counsel that on the
faces of the contents of F.I.R, it appears that it has been managed, whereas,
no one from the police side has received any injury nor even police vehicle has
been damaged. Learned Counsel further submits that inspite of the fact that
alleged incidence took place on National Highway where there were shops and
other houses, however, police has not associated any private mashir or even the
driver, conductor or passenger of the bus, which according to police was being
robbed by the accused persons. It has been prayed that the applicant may be
released on bail, as he is behind the bars for more than 1 ½ years, whereas,
not a single prosecution witness has been examined, who are all police
witnesses.
2. While confronted with the
submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant, learned D.P.G for State could not controvert the
factual position as stated by the
learned Counsel for applicant, however, submits that since the applicant was
arrested along with weapon, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on
bail.
3. We have heard the learned
Counsel for the applicant as well as D.P.G, and perused the record. It appears
to be a case of ineffective firing, whereas, no one from the police party has
received any injury nor police vehicle has been damaged, inspite of the allegation that the encounter
continued for about 10 minutes, whereas only four empties of 30 bore pistol
have been shown to have been recovered from the place of alleged incidence. No
private mashir has been associated by the police inspite of the fact that the
alleged incidence took place on National Highway, where reportedly there were
shops and other houses nor even the driver, cleaner or any passenger of the
Bus, which according to prosecution story was being robbed by the present
applicant has been shown as prosecution witness. We are of the opinion that the
case against the present applicant requires further inquiry. Accordingly, the
applicant Fayyaz S/o Allah Wasayo is granted bail in the above crime subject to
furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Two Lacs) and P.R bond
in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. However, the applicant
is directed to attend the learned trial Court regularly, and in case of any
violation of the concession of bail by the applicant, the learned trial Court
shall be at liberty to proceed against him in accordance with law.
Bail application stands
disposed of.
JUDGE
JUDGE
A.R.BROHI