IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-603 of 2018

Applicant               :                Irfan Ali s/o Irshad Hussain Jagirani

Through Mr.Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate

State                    :                  Through Mr.Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G.

Date of hearing   :                  26.11.2018

Date of order      :                  26.11.2018

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention, committed Qatl-e-Amd of Chakar Khan by administering some poisonous substance to him, for that the present case was registered. 

2.                On having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s.498 Cr.PC.

3.                It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant partly, there is delay of about more than one month in lodgment of the FIR yet the name of the applicant is not appearing therein, there is nothing in report of the chemical examiner which may suggest that the deceased has died of taking poisonous substance. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicant, as according to him he is apprehending unjustified arrest at the hands of police.

4.                Learned A.P.G for the State has opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that the case is fresh one.

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

6.                Admittedly, there is delay of more than one month is lodgment of the FIR yet the name of the applicant is not appearing therein which appears to be significant. The very case has been initiated on the basis of extra-judicial confession of Mst.Shabana wife of the deceased, allegedly made before complainant Muhammad Allam and his witnesses, which even if is believed to be true, then it appears to be a very weak piece of evidence. There is nothing in report of chemical examiner which may suggest that the deceased has died of taking poisonous substance. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail, as he is apprehending unjustified arrest at the hands of police.

7.                In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

8.                The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                          JUDGE