ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No. S-527 of 2017.

Date	Order with signature of Judge

Present

Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito.

Applicants: 1. Manzoor Hussain son of Qadir Bux, bycaste Panhwar, Resident of village Tagro Ripri, Taluka Gambat, District Khairpur.

2. Imdadullah.

3. Sajjadullah.

4. Hamadullah.

All sons of Attaullah, bycaste Panhwar, Resident of Mohalla Shahbaz Colony, Kumb, Taluka Kotdiji, District Khairpur.

5. Abdul Khaliq son of Abdul Razzaque, bycaste Panhwar, R/O village Tagro Ripri, Taluka Gambat, District Khairpur.

Mr. Muhammad Ali Napar advocate for applicants.

Cr. Bail Application No. S-84 of 2018.

Applicants Ahmed Ali son of Abdul Rehman, Bycaste Panhwar, R/O village Tagro Ripri, Taluka Gambat, District Khairpur.

Mr. Muhammad Ali Napar advocate for applicant.

Respondent. The State.

Mr. Syed Ali Aamir Shah advocate for complainant.

Mr. Syed Sardar Ali Shah Rizvi, Deputy Prosecutor General.

Date of hearing. 10-09-2018.

O R D E R.

.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- By this single Order, I intend to dispose of the captioned bail applications arising out of one and same crime. Bail Application No.S-527/2017 is directed against the order dated 30-08-2017 passed by learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge Khairpur, whereby the Pre-Arrest Bail Application of the applicants/accused Manzoor Hussain, Imdadullah, Sajadullah, Abdul Khaliq and Hamadullah was dismissed. The Bail Application No.S-84/2018 is directed against the order dated 30-08-2017 whereby the Pre-Arrest Bail Application of applicant/accused Ahmed Ali Panhwar was dismissed by the same Court.

2. Briefly, the facts of the prosecution case are that complainant Muhammad Azam Tariq lodged the F.I.R. on 13-06-2017 alleging therein that on the day of report he along his brother Tahir aged about 20/22 years, cousin Abdul Rasheed and his another brother Muhammad Tayyab were going to his lands. It was about 7-30 pm, when they reached at his land, where they saw and identified accused Naeemullah armed with SBBL gun, Manzoor Panhwar, Irshadullah, Imdadullah, Inamullah, Alisher, Ghulam Murtaza, Ghulam Muhammad armed with TT pistols and Sajadullah came there. While coming accused Naeemullah pointed his gun and threatened the complainant party not to move, otherwise he will kill them. then accused Sajadullah instigated accused Naeemullah to kill Muhammad Tahir, who fired upon Muhammad Tahir, who sustained the fire shot, cries and fell down. Then all the accused persons escaped away from the spot by making aerial firing. Complainant saw that his brother Muhammad Tahir succumbed to the injuries and died at the spot. Ultimately complainant appeared at PS and lodged the above said F.I.R.

3. It is, inter-alia, contended by the learned counsel for the applicants/accused that applicants/accused are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to dispute over the landed property, which is admitted by the complainant in the FIR; that all the witnesses are closely related to the complainant and there is no any independent witnesses has been sighted by the complainant; that mere presence of the applicants/accused has been disclosed by the complainant in the F.I.R. and no any specific role has been attributed by the complainant against the applicants/accused; that co-accused Irshadullah has been granted post arrest bail by the learned trial Court and case of applicants/accused stands on same footing to that of co-accused, who has been released on bail and they are also entitled for concession of bail.

4. On the other, learned counsel for complainant has argued that applicants/accused are nominated in the F.I.R. as they along with co-accused Naeemullah duly armed with deadly weapons with their common object came at the land of complainant and committed the murder his brother Muhammad Tahir; that F.I.R. has been promptly lodged by the complainant; that after registration of F.I.R., I.O has recorded 161 CrPC statements of PWs, who have fully supported the version of complainant. Lastly he prayed for dismissal of instant bail applications.

5. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General has conceded the bail plea of the applicants/accused on the ground that co-accused Irshadullah has been granted bail by the learned trial Court against whom the same allegation of presence at the scene of offence is leveled by the complainant in the F.I.R.

6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the applicants/accused, learned counsel for the complainant, learned APG for the State and have gone through the material available on the record with their assistance.

7. Perusal of record shows that mere presence of the applicants/accused has been shown by the complainant in the F.I.R. and no specific role has been attributed against them. Enmity of complainant with applicants/accused over the landed property has been admitted by the complainant in the F.I.R. and complainant has thrown the net much wider to catch the as many as accused persons. Moreover, the case of applicants/accused stands on same footing to that of co-accused Irshadullah, who has been granted post arrest bail by learned trial Court, therefore, the case of applicants/accused also requires for further enquiry and they are also entitled for concession of same relief.

8. In view of above, the interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused is confirmed on same terms and conditions and the above instant pre arrest bail applications stand disposed of accordingly.

9. Needless, to mention that the observations made herein above are tentative in nature and would not prejudice the case of either party at trial.

Judge

Nasim/P.A