ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
 
Crl. Bail Application No.412 of 2012

----------------------------------------------------

Date              Order with signature of Judge

----------------------------------------------------

 

Date of hearing 28.05.2012

--------------------------

 

Mr. Jamroz Khan Afridi Advocate for the Applicant.

 

Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan learned APG.

 

 

Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi J;     By this order I would decide the bail application filed by the Applicant Muhammad Iqbal.

 

       Precisely, the facts of the case as narrated in the FIR are that on 09.11.2011 Complainant’s brother Adnan was murdered by inflicting knife injuries by some unknown persons.

 

Learned Counsel for the Applicant contended that the Applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant in collusion with the police due to malafide intention. Neither the name of the Applicant nor his Hulia/description has been mentioned in the FIR. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the Applicant that on perusal of the charge-sheet and the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C no direct or indirect evidence is available against the Applicant/accused. It is urged by the learned Counsel for the Applicant that the case of the Applicant is of further inquiry therefore, the Applicant is entitled for grant of bail.

 

On the other hand Mr. Muhammad Ibqal Awan learned APG vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Applicant and submitted that just after two days of the incident Applicant was apprehended/arrested and on his pointation blood stained knife was recovered, which was sealed in presence of witnesses, the same was sent to Chemical Examiner for report and report has come in positive. Learned APG has further argued that Mst. Naila wife of the Applicant/accused had relations with the deceased and the deceased has obtained private accommodation on monthly rent of Rs.2000/- in Al-Sadaf Colony where Naila with her five daughters was residing and the Applicant/accused refused to live in that premises. During investigation Naila the wife of the Applicant according to the learned APG informed to the police that on 09.11.2011 deceased Adnan at about 10:00 P.M. came to her house. At about 11:30 P.M. when Naila came at the door to see her off and opened the door saw that Applicant Iqbal was standing. Mst. Saira Wife of the landlord told her that after getting knife injuries Adnan succumbed to death.

 

I have heard Mr. Jamroz Khan Afridi learned Counsel for the Applicant, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan learned APG and perused the relevant material available on record with their assistance.

 

On tentative assessment of the material, it appears that strong circumstantial evidence is available against the Applicant/accused. Investigating Officer of  the case done very poor investigation in the matter and has not cited Naila wife of the Applicant as a prosecution witness in the charge-sheet, who during investigation informed material facts to the Investigating Officer regarding her relations with the deceased. Mst. Naila wife of the Applicant had seen the Applicant when he was standing outside her house and was chasing the deceased Adnan.

Prima facie it is established from material available on record that a blood stained knife was recovered on the pointation of the Applicant/accused, which was sent for chemical analyses and report of the Chemical Examiner is in positive. Sufficient material is available on record which connects the Applicant/accused in the commission of offence. Accused in a murder case would not be granted bail when prima facie reasonable grounds are available to show that he is guilty of offence.

 

Above are the reasons of my short order dated 28.05.2012 whereby the instant Bail Application was dismissed with the direction to the Trail Court to examine at-least three private witnesses within one month period and conclude the trial within a period of three months from receipt of the order.

 

Observations made hereinabove are of tentative nature and the trial Court shall not be influenced by any such observation.

           

                                               

 

                                                                                                J U D G E