ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail. Application No.S- 16 of 2020

For hearing of bail application

01.06.2020

Mr. Ghulam Shabbir Dayo Advocate for applicants 1 & 3

Mr. Aftab Hussain Shar, Advocate for applicants 2 & 4

Mr. Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro Advocate for the complainant

Mr. Abdul Rehman Kolachi, DPG for the State

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J;-. It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawfully assembly being armed with deadly weapons and in prosecution of their common object committed Qatl-e-Amd of Abdul Sattar by causing him fire shot injuries and then went away by making aerial firing to create harassment, for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 4^thAdditional Sessions Judge Khairpur, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under Section 498-A Cr.P.C.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party in order to satisfy their matrimonial dispute with them; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about two days; the applicants on investigation have been found to be innocent and their names have been placed in column No.2 of the charge sheet by the police, therefore, they are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on the point of malafide. In support of their contention, they have relied upon case of Ali Akber vs. The State (SBLR 2011 Sindh 1).

4. Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants by contending that they have actively participated in commission of incident. In support of their contention, they have relied upon case of Muhammad Yusuf vs. The State (1986 SCMR 182).

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

6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about two days, such delay having not being explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The active role of committing death of the deceased by causing him fire shot injuries is attributed to co-accused Muhammad Ayoub, Ali Dino alias Zawar, Abdul Rehman and Ismail. The role attributed to the applicants in commission of incident is only to the extent of their presence and / or making fires in air, which appears to be significant. The applicants on investigation have been found to be innocent and their names have been placed in column No.2 of the charge sheet by the police. Parties are already disputed over matrimonial affairs, therefore, the possibility of the false involvement of the applicants could not be ruled out.

7. Case of Muhammad Yusuf (supra) which is relied upon by learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In that case leave to appeal was refused by Hon’ble Supreme Court with an observation that the sentence / conviction awarded to the accused is not excessive. In the instant matter none is convicted what to talk of leave to appeal on point of excessive sentence/conviction.

8. In view of above, the instant bail application is accepted, consequently interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

9. Needless to say that the observations made above are tentative in nature and may not affect the case of either of the party at trial.

Judge

ARBROHI