IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-590 of 2018

Applicants             :                Faheem Raza and five others through

Mr.Safdar Ali Ghouri, Advocate

Complainant       :                  Jameel Ahmed Mugheri through

                                                Mr.Habibullah Ghouri, Advocate

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

Date of hearing   :                  21.12.2018

Date of order      :                  21.12.2018

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is case of the prosecution that the applicants with rest of the culprits, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, not only committed Qatl-e-Amd of Liaquat Ali, Ghulam Murtaza and Deedar Hussain, by causing them fire shot injuries but also caused fire shot injuries to complainant Jameel Ahmed and PWs Shahzor, Zahoor, Muneer Ahmed and Abdul Razzaq with intention to commit their murder, for that the present case was registered. 

2.                The applicants having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Qamber, have 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 applicants that they being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party, there is delay of about two days in lodgment of the FIR, there is counter version of the incident and more-so complainant Jameel Ahmed and PWs Shahzor, Muneer Ahmed, Zahoor Ahmed and Ali Muhammad (father of deceased Murtaza), Zahid Hussain (son of deceased Deedar) and Tahir Muhammad Khan (brother of deceased Liaquat) respectively by filing their affidavits have raised no objection to grant of bail to the applicants. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicants, as they according to him are apprehending unjustified arrest at the hands of police.

4.                Learned A.P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have recoded no objection to grant of bail to the applicants by contending that the parties have compounded the offence outside of the Court.

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

6.                There is delay of two days in lodgment of the FIR, such delay could not be lost sight of in the circumstances of the case. There is counter version of the incident. More-so complainant, witnesses and certain legal heirs of the said deceased by filing their affidavits have recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicants. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail as they are apprehending their unjustified arrest at the hands of police.

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

8.                The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                          JUDGE

..