IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-247 of 2018

Applicant               :                Sajid Hussain @ Baboo s/o Deedar Hussain

Through Mr.Muhammad Hashim Soomro, Advocate

Complainant       :                  Waseem Ahmed Tunio through

Mr.Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate

State                    :                  Through Mr.Raja Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G.

Date of hearing   :                  09.11.2018

Date of order      :                  09.11.2018

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, by committing trespass into house of complainant Waseem Ahmed abducted his wife Mst.Nighat Saima with her daughter baby Hiba Waseem, with intention to have rape with her (wife of complainant), for that the present case was registered.

2.                On having been refused post-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Larkana, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s.497 Cr.PC, which is second in series, the earlier one was dismissed as not pressed.

3.                It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that he being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police, there is delay of about one day in lodgment of the FIR, the complainant has raised no objection to grant of bail to the applicant by filing his affidavit. By contending so, he sought for his release on bail, as according to him his case is calling for further enquiry.

4.                Learned A.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have recoded no objection to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that the complainant has exonerated the applicant by filing his affidavit.

5.                I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

6.                There is delay of about one day in lodgment of the FIR, the same could not be lost sight of. Complainant Waseem Ahmed now by filing his affidavit has recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicant by stating therein that he is not real culprit of the incident. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to be admitted to bail on point of further enquiry.

7.                In case of Muhammad Najeeb vs. State (2009 SCMR-448), it has been held by Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that;

“complainant initially had nominated the accused in the FIR but later-on through an affidavit he has expressed his satisfaction with regard to innocence of the accused, the case of the accused was of further enquiry”.

8.                In view of facts and reasons discussed above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.  

9.                The instant application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                  JUDGE