ORDER
SHEET
------------------------------------------------------
Date Order
with signature of Judge
------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing 19.10.2015
Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.
Waseem Hashmi, Advocate for Complainant.
Ms.
Akhtar Rehana, APG.
SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI J; By this order I intend to dispose of instant Criminal
Bail Application filed by the Applicant/accused Muhammad Azam son of Ahmed
Khan.
Learned Counsel for the
Applicant contended that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been
falsely implicated in the case by the complainant with malafide intention and
ulterior motives. He urged that there is delay of 21 hours in lodging the FIR
for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution, which
reflects that FIR was lodged after due deliberation and consultation. Learned
Counsel for the applicant further submits that no specific role has been
assigned to the Applicants/accused. Learned Counsel for the applicant urged
that no motive to commit alleged offence as per contents of FIR or other
prosecution story has been mentioned. Learned Counsel further urged that
investigation has been completed and challan has been submitted as such he is
no more required by the police for investigation. He has relied upon 2015 SCMR
655 (Muhammad Faiz versus the State) and 2014 P.Cr.L.J. 133 (Saeed Ahmad versus
the State).
Learned Counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed
the grant of bail to the Applicant and submitted that sufficient material
available on record to connect the Applicant in the present crime. He further
contended that the Applicant is involved in commission of a heinous offence
therefore, he is not entitled for leniency therefore, prayed to dismiss the
instant bail application.
Learned APG opposed the grant of bail to the Applicant
and adopted the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the Applicant.
Heard Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Advocate for the Applicant,
Mr. Waseem Hashmi Advocate for the complainant, Ms.
Akhtar Rehana APG for the State and perused the material available on record as
well as citations with their assistance.
On tentative assessment of the material available on
record, it appears that FIR was lodged with the delay of about 21 hours for
which no plausible and tangible explanation has been given by the prosecution. No
specific role has been assigned to the Applicant and allegations levelled in
the FIR are of general nature which requires further inquiry. Even nothing is
mentioned in the FIR that applicant had any weapon at the time of incident. No
motive to commit alleged offence has been given by the prosecution or the
complainant that why without any reason accused persons suddenly came at the
door of the complainant, started abusing the complainant party and thereafter,
started firing upon them with intention to kill them.
In the case reported in 2012
YLR 320 (Waqas Ahmed Siddiqui versus the State) it has been held that;
“Deeper appreciation of the record could not be gone
into, but a tentative assessment was to be made, first to find out as to whether the
accused was connected with the commission of offence or not. Issue involved in
the present case, could not be decided without recording of evidence, coupled
with the fact that there was delay in lodging of FIR. Case required further
inquiry in terms of
subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C. Accused was admitted to bail, in
circumstances.
Facts and circumstances of
the case, as discussed above, makes the case against the Applicant doubtful and
of further inquiry, therefore, I find no reasons to withhold the concession of
bail to the Applicant.
Above are the reasons of my short order dated 19.10.2015
whereby present Applicant was granted bail subject to furnishing solvent surety
in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) and P.R. Bond in the like
amount ot the satisfaction of the trial Court.
The observations made
are of tentative nature and the Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of
such observations.
Karachi J
U D G E
Dated:_________________