ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

                                              Cr.B.A.No.S- 246    of    2013

DATE        ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

27.06.2013.

Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Baloch, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Ahsan Gul Dahri, Advocate for complainant.

Mr. Shahid Shaikh, A.P.G. for the State.

                                    =

            The applicant is booked in Crime No.05/2013 u/s 337-A(ii), L(ii), 504, 34 PPC registered at Police Station Bachalpur for allegedly causing hatchet injuries to complainant Shahadat Ali which was declared by the Doctor as Shujja-e-Maddiha, falling u/s 337-A(ii) PPC. The application of the present applicant for grant of post arrest bail was rejected by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Shaheed Benazirabad and thereafter he has approached this Court through instant application.

            Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Baloch, the learned counsel for the applicant has contended that there is admitted enmity between the parties as per F.I.R. and so also about 24 hours delay in lodging the F.I.R which has not been plausibly explained. Per learned counsel, the injury attributed to the present applicant falls u/s 337-A(ii) PPC which is punishable upto five years and thereby does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C and thereby present applicant is entitled to grant of bail. In support of his contentions, learned counsel has placed reliance on the cases reported as Ghulam Mustafa and another Vs. The State (2007 P.Cr.L.J 116), Nazar Abbas Vs. Nazoo and others (2002 P.Cr.L.J 582) and Muhammad Issa Vs. The State (2009 MLD 21).

            Mr. Shahid Shaikh, learned A.P.G. duly assisted by Mr. Ahsan Gul Dahri, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that injury attributed to the present applicant is in conformity with the medical certificate and the witnesses have supported the version of prosecution in their 161 Cr.P.C. statements and the said injury is apparently on vital part of the body therefore, they have opposed the grant of this application.

            I have given careful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and so also gone through the police papers with the assistance of learned A.P.G and consulted with the case law relied by learned counsel for the applicant.

            As per contents of F.I.R., there is dispute between the complainant and applicant Ghulam Abbas on landed property. The incident has allegedly taken place on 10.02.2013 at 1300 hours while the F.I.R. is registered on 11.02.2013 at 1600 hours with a delay of about more than 24 hours while the police station is at the distance of 7/8 Kilometers. The plausibility of delay in lodging the F.I.R. is to be adjudged at trial. The medical evidence prima facie shows that injury attributed to the present applicant is falling u/s 337-A(ii) PPC which is punishable only for five years and does not come within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. However, the medical certificate has also been challenged before the Medical Board and its result is still awaited. The challan has been submitted, the P.Ws are brothers of the complainant, therefore, there is no apprehension of tampering with the evidence. On tentative assessment of the record, I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the applicant is admitted to bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

                                                                                                            JUDGE                                                          

Tufail