ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-343 of 2020

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

                                    For hearing of bail application.

03.09.2020

Mr. Sarfraz Ali Abbasi, Advocate for the applicant

                        Mr. Nizamuddin Abro, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Muhammad Noonari, Deputy Prosecutor General

                        ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~

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 Muhammad Ayoob, by causing him fire shot injuries, for that the present case was registered.

2.        The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s 498-A Cr.P.C.

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 party in order to satisfy its enmity with him over the plot; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day; no specific injury to the deceased is attributed to the applicant; one of the pistol secured in the present case has not been found matched with the empties secured from the place of incident; the complainant and his witnesses are related inter-se and the applicant at the time of incident was on his duty at his School, as is evident of the affidavits filed by his colleague Sajjad Ali Shah, Ghulam Jeelani  and Asadullah. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicant on point of malafide and further enquiry.

4.        Learned D.P.G. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of bail to applicant by contending that the applicant has actively participated in commission of the incident by causing fire shot injury to the deceased and the delay in lodgment of the FIR is explained properly, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail. By contending so they sought for dismissal of instant bail application.

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

6.        The name of the applicant is appearing in the FIR with specific allegation that he with rest of the culprits, went over to the complainant party and then in furtherance of their common intention in order to satisfy their dispute with the complainant party over the plot, committed Qatl-e-Amd of Muhammad Ayoob by causing him fire shot injures. No doubt, the fire shot injury sustained by the deceased attributed to the applicant is not specified but it does not mean that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party. It is true that there is delay in lodgment of the FIR by one day but the same has been explained in the FIR itself by the complainant. The delay in lodgment of the FIR even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. If the pistol used in commission of the incident secured from someone else has not been found matched with empties secured from the place of incident then concession of such conflict could hardly be resolved in favour of the applicant at this stage. The affidavits filed by his colleague Sajjad Ali Shah, Ghulam Jeelani and Asadullah impliedly declaring the applicant to be innocent have got no bearing on the facts of the case as they are not witness of the prosecution. The complainant and his witnesses may be related inter-se but their relationship is not enough to disbelieve them at this stage, they are appearing to be natural witnesses to the incident. The deeper appreciation of the facts and circumstances even otherwise is not permissible at bail stage. Prima facie no malafide is apparent of the record, which may justify admitting the applicant to pre-arrest bail. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence for which he is charged. No case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant is made out. Consequently, the instant bail application is dismissed.

7.                    The order whereby the applicant was admitted to interim pre-arrest bail is recalled and vacated.

                    J U D G E.