ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No. 182 of  2009. 

Date	Order with signature of Judge

1. For orders on office objection (A).

2. For hearing.

08.05.2009.

                        Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro, Advocate for the applicants.

                        Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, State counsel.

~~~~

Syed Shafqat Ali Shah Masoomi, J-.       Through this application, the applicants seek pre arrest bail in crime No. 25/2009, P.S Airport, District Jacobabad, under section 448, 452 P.P.C.

                        Prosecution case in nutshell is that on 04.04.2009, complainant Jaro Khan lodged F.I.R with P.S Airport, alleging therein that he is Reader and Nazir of court of 1^st Senior Civil Judge, Jacobabad, and as per order of High Court of Sindh, Circuit Court, Larkana, passed in C.P. No. 36/2004, and Execution application No. 02/2003, the possession of property C.S   No. 937/1, ward-1, Gola street Jacobabad, measuring 193/6 square feet was with court, for which Irshad Ahmed Khan Golo had filed an application under order 21 rule 99 and 103 CPC for return of possession which was dismissed. It is further alleged that Irshad Ahmed and his attorney after breaking the locks of property took its possession and filed civil suit No. 39/2008, on 04.08.2008, wherein he has shown the property under possession of court, in his possession. For which as per order of court dated 19.3.2009, complainant appeared at police station and lodged F.I.R to the above effect. 

                        Learned counsel for the applicants mainly contended that F.I.R is result of misunderstanding as the alleged premises are still locked and sealed. He next contended that the applicants are respectable and highly educated persons; further that the applicant No. 1 has remained as Chairman Public Service Commission, Balochistan, so also he is Sardar of his community. Learned counsel further contended that applicants are not in possession of the premises in question. He lastly submitted that the applicants have joined the investigation.

                        Learned State counsel has conceded to confirmation of bail.

                        The premises in question are still locked and not in possession of the applicants as stated by learned counsel at bar and the offences with which the applicants are charged are not punishable with death, transportation for life or for ten years and as per the view of Hon’ble apex Court in case reported in 1995 PLD S.C 34, that the grant of bail is rule in offences which are not punishable with death, transportation for life or for ten years and refusal is an exception. The applicants have joined the investigation.  In view of the above circumstances, the interim pre arrest bail already granted to applicants vide order dated 13.4.2009,is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

                                                                                                            Judge