ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-486 of 2020.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

06.12.2021

                        Mr. Rafique Ahmed Abro, Advocate for the applicants.

                        Mr. Abdul Ghaffar, Asstt. Prosecutor General for State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits by committing trespass into house of complainant Mushtaq Ahmed fired at him with intention to commit his murder, such fires eventually hit to his daughter Mst.Reshma who by sustaining those fires died, the applicants and others then made their escape good by making fires in air to create harassment, for that the present case was registered.

2.         The applicants, on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 4^th Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under section 498 Cr.PC.

3.         It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant in order to settle his dispute with them on accounts; they on investigation were let off by the police and co-accused Sadoro with utmost similar role has already been admitted to pre-arrest bail by learned trial Court. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicants on point of malafide.

4.         Learned Asstt.P.G for the State has recorded no objection to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants.

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

6.         On investigation, it transpired that the complainant himself has committed murder of his daughter Mst.Reshma by causing her fire shot injuries to her and then involved the applicants in such incident falsely only to settle his dispute with them over accounts. On arrest from the complainant, has been secured by the police the crime weapon which he allegedly used in commission of the incident. The applicants were let off by the police finding them to be innocent and they have been joined in trial by learned trial Magistrate. Be that as it may, co-accused Sadoro with utmost similar role has already been admitted to pre-arrest bail by learned trial Court; therefore, no useful purpose would be served, if the applicants are taken into custody and then are admitted to bail on point of consistency.

7.         In case of Muhammad Ramzan vs. Zafarullah and another                                (1986 SCMR-1380), it was held by the Honourable Court that;

“no useful purpose was likely to be served if bail of accused(respondent) was cancelled on any technical ground because after arrest he could again be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed other accused were already on bail”.

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

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

  J U D G E