ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA  

Crl. Bail Appln. No. S-  165 of 2018.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

14.05.2018.

          Mr. Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro, Advocate for applicant.

          Mr. Sharafuddin Kanhar, A.P.G.

~~~~~~~

Amjad Ali Sahito, J:    Through this application, applicant Nazir Ahmed son of Allah Rakhio Mazari seeks his admission to post-arrest bail in Crime No.63 of 2017, registered with Police Station Guddu, District Kashmore @ Kandhkot, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 311, 148, 149 P.P.C. His similar prayer was declined by learned trial Court vide its Order dated 23.12.2017.

2.       The case of prosecution in brief is that, ASI Mukhtiar Ahmed Choliyani of P.S Guddu lodged report on behalf of the State to the effect that on 15.11.2017 he received information through spy that on 13.11.2017 accused persons, namely, Muhammad Hussain, Ali Hassan, Nazir Ahmed, Shahzad Ali, Saleem Hussain have committed murder of Mst. Fozia by strangulating her under the allegation of “Siyah-Kari”, and have took away her dead body in a car to misplace it and on receipt of such information the police party reached to pointed place, where they found the car and stopped it; accused Ali Hassan left the driving seat, while accused Nazir Ahmed, Shahzad, Muhammad Hussain and Saleem Hussain tried to escape but the police party apprehended one of them, namely, Nazir Ahmed. The police prepared such mashirnama of arrest of accused and recovery of car and on enquiry captive disclosed that all of them have strangulated Mst. Fozia and misplaced her dead body. Ultimately, the F.I.R to the above effect was lodged.

3.       Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that the applicant is innocent and he has been implicated in this case with malafide intention and ulterior motives by the police; that F.I.R is delayed for three days; that incident is un-witnessed and un-seen, as none has seen any of accused including present applicant while committing murder of Mst. Fozia; that dead body of deceased has not been recovered, so also there no any recovery of incriminating article from possession of applicant; that there are general allegations against all the accused including present applicant and no specific role is assigned to him. Per learned counsel co-accused Muhammad Hussain has already been admitted to pre arrest by this Court vide Order dated 12.3.2018, vide Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 17 of 2018, as such according to learned counsel the applicant also deserves same concession and treatment on the basis of rule of consistency, because his case is on same footings to that of co-accused. A copy of bail grant order of co-accused Muhammad Hussain has been produced with this bail application as annexure-“C”. Lastly, learned counsel prayed for grant of bail in favor of applicant.

4.       On other hand, learned A.P.G. opposed grant of bail to applicant by submitting that he has been nominated in F.I.R for committing murder of an innocent lady under the allegation of “Siyah-Kari”. He prayed for rejection of the bail application. He however did not controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for applicant and that fact that co-accused with similar allegation has been admitted to pre arrest bail by this Court.

5.       I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the available record. It is matter of record that, co-accused Muhammad Hussain with similar allegation has been admitted to pre-arrest bail by this Court and case of present applicant appears to be on same footings; therefore, rule of consistency is applicable to the case of present applicant also. Besides this, there is delay of about three days in lodging the F.I.R and prima-facie the incident appears to be is un-witnessed and un-seen, as according to contents of the F.I.R nobody has seen any of accused while committing murder of Mst. Fozia and dead body of deceased has not been recovered on pointation of any of the accused.

6.       In view of the above factors, the applicant has been able to make out a case for grant of bail in his favor. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands allowed and applicant Nazir Ahmed Mazari is granted bail upon his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- (Two hundred thousand rupees) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

7.       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.

                                                                JUDGE

Ansari/*