ODER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Revision Appln. No. S – 82 of 2012

Date                                        Order with signature of Hon’ble Judge

Priority case

1.    For hearing of main case

2.    For hearing of M.A No.6636/2016 (S/A)

 

28.01.2019

            Mr. Achar Khan Gabole Advocate for the Applicant/Surety

            Syed Sardar Ali Shah, DPG for the State

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<

 

 

Irshad Ali Shah, J;  The applicant by way of instant Criminal Revision Application, has impugned the order dated 19.11.2012 of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Ghotki, whereby he has been imposed the penalty of Rs.100,000/- each for five accused on account of breach of bail bond, who were facing trial before him for an offence punishable under Section  3 and 4 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005.

2.                     It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant/surety that the absence of the accused for which the surety bond executed by the applicant was not willful but on account of tribal dispute. Subsequently they surrendered before the learned trial Court and have been acquitted of the charge vide order dated 14.12.2011. By contending so, he sought for setting aside of the impugned order as according to him the bail bond was executed by the applicant in favour of the accused on humanitarian ground and not for any monetary gains.

3.                     Learned DPG for the State has sought for dismissal of the instant criminal Revision Application by stating that the breach of bond is evident.

4.                     I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned DPG for the State and perused the record.

5.                     No doubt, the accused after their release on bail abscond away but there could be no denial of the fact that such absconsion on the part of the accused was not willful but on account of tribal dispute. The accused subsequently surrendered before the learned trial Court and have been acquitted of the charge. In that situation, it would be unjustified to maintain the impugned order of penalty upon the applicant. It is set‑aside.

6.                     Instant Cr. Revision Application stands disposed of in the above terms.     

Judge

 

 

 

 

ARBROHI