ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 138 of 2018.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

06.04.2018.

          Mr. Mumtaz Ali Panhwar, Advocate for applicant.

          Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.

~~~~~~~

Amjad Ali Sahito, J:    Through this application, applicant Ghulam Shabir son of Ghulam Muhammad Shar seeks his admission to pre-arrest bail in Crime No.11/2018 registered with Taluka P.S Larkana, for offences punishable under Sections 337-F (v), 147, 148 & 504 P.P.C. The applicant was admitted to interim pre-arrest bail vide Order dated 26.03.2018.

          The allegation against applicant is that he caused lathi blow to complainant on little finger of his right hand, while rest of accused caused him slaps.

          Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that the applicant is innocent and he has been implicated in this case due to previous enmity, as previously nephew of the applicant was murdered by the complainant party and such F.I.R vide Crime No.94/2014 of P.S Taluka was registered against complainant party and in order to put pressure upon applicant/ accused party to withdraw from above case, the complainant has implicated him in this case; that the F.I.R is delayed for eight days. Learned counsel further contended that no such incident has ever taken place, but the complainant has managed a medical certificate in his favour. Per learned counsel the applicant has joined the trial and regularly attending the trial Court. Lastly, he prayed for confirmation of bail.

          On other hand, learned A.P.G. opposed confirmation of interim bail in favour of the applicant on the ground that name of  applicant appears in the F.I.R with specific role of causing lathi blow to complainant and no malafide is on the part of complainant. He lastly prayed for dismissal of the application.

          I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the available record. As per record there exists previous enmity between the parties, as a criminal case bearing F.I.R No.94/2014 of Taluka P.S Larkana already stands registered against brother of present complainant. There is inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R and except Section 337-F (v) P.P.C all the sections are bail-able and maximum punishment provided for Section 337-F (v) P.P.C is only upto five years, as such the offence with which the applicant stands charged do not fall within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Furthermore, the applicant has joined the trial and attending the trial Court regularly.

          Moreover, per guidelines provided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while granting pre arrest bail, there must be malafides or ulterior motives on the part of complainant or police and in the instant case there exists previous enmity between the parties, therefore, question of malafide intention and ulterior motives does arise on the part of the complainant. I am also mindful of the fact that a tentative assertion is to be made, just to find out as to whether the accused/ applicant is connected with the commission of the alleged offence or not. Above legal position is kept in mind and the record of this case examined. It may be noted that applicant has successfully made out a case for further enquiry in terms of Subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the pre arrest bail  application was allowed vide short order dated 06.04.2018 and the interim pre arrest bail already granted to applicant vide Order dated 26.03.2018 was confirmed on same terms and conditions. These are the detailed reasons for short order dated 06.04.2018.

          Needles to mention here that the assertions made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case on merits.

Dated: 09.04.2018.

                                                                JUDGE

Ansari/*