ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 142 of 2018.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

30.04.2018.

1.       For orders on office objections.

2.       For hearing of bail application.

          Mr. Ali Bux Baloch, Advocate for applicant alongwith applicant.

          Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.

          Complainant is present in person.

~~~~~~~

Amjad Ali Sahito, J:    This order will dispose of the captioned bail application, through which applicant Mujahid Ali Jhatial is seeking pre-arrest bail, in a case registered against him at Police Station Badeh, vide FIR No.12 of 2017, under Sections 302, 377, 511 and 34 P.P.C.

          I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for parties and perused the record placed before me. From the hearing of argument and perusal of record, I have observed as under: -

(a) The allegation against applicant as per F.I.R is that he alongwith three co-accused taken the adopted son of complainant, namely, Arif Hussain with them for fishing, where they attempted to coming “Zina” with him and on his refusal and resistance they caused him lathi blows, which resulted into his death in hospital. 

(b) The applicant is nominated in FIR, and not only there is allegation of last seen against him, but it is alleged against him by the deceased before his death that he (applicant) alongwith other accused attempted to commit Zina with deceased and his on refusal and resistance all the accused including applicant caused lathi blows to deceased, which resulted into his death.

(c) In the incident a young nephew/ adopted son of the complainant, who resisted commission of unnatural offence with him, has been done to death.

(d) The delay in lodging the F.I.R has been explained properly by the complainant.

(e) Medical evidence supports the ocular account of the prosecution case.

(f) The main ingredient for grant of pre arrest bail is lacking in the instant case there appears no malafides or ulterior motives on the part of the complainant.

(g) There appears also no apprehension of malafide arrest of applicant, as his plea for pre arrest bail was re-called by learned lower Court on 19.04.2017, while instant bail application was presented before this Court on 28^th March, 2018, and it was fixed before Court on 29.3.2018, on which the notice was directed to be issued the Prosecutor. After that, the matter was fixed in Court twice i.e. on 06.4.2018 and 16.4.2018, but on both dates the matter could not proceed due to absence of the counsel for applicant. During such span of time, the applicant has not been arrested by the police. 

          In view of the above observations, I am of the considered opinion that the applicant has not been able to make out a case for grant of extra ordinary relief of pre arrest bail, as such the bail application in hand stands dismissed.

                                                                JUDGE

Ansari/*