ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-830 of 2021

Date	Order with signature of Judge

Applicants: Atta Muhammad and others, through

Mr. Muhammad Hanif Maitlo,

Advocate

Complainant: Nemo

State: Through Mr.Shafi Muhammad Mahar,

Deputy Prosecutor General

Date of hearing: 10.01.2022

Dated of order: 10.01.2022

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through this bail application, applicants/ accused Atta Muhammad alias Wazir Ali, Badshah and Ali Gohar all sons of Fazal Muhammad Narejo, are seeking their pre-arrest bail in FIR No.49/2021, registered at Police Station Khuhra, District Khairpur, u/s 506/2, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 147, 148, 149 and 504 PPC. Earlier their same plea was declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gambat vide order dated 20.12.2021.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants has pointed out that their bail application was dismissed by the trial court on the basis of FIR No.37/2021 by holding that applicants have misused the concession of bail by issuing threats to the complainant. He submits that such FIR was registered before the present FIR and not after the present FIR.

3. Learned DPG has conceded for confirmation of bail on the ground that there is delay of fourteen days in registration of FIR which has not been properly explained by the complainant.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned DPG and perused the material available on record with their able assistance.

5. From perusal of record it appears that the incident as alleged in the FIR has taken place on 11.05.2021, however the FIR of the same incident was registered on 25.05.2021 i.e after delay of 14 days which has not been properly explained by the complainant. Record further reflects that the offence does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in these cases is a rule and refusal is an exception, however, strong reasons for refusal are required. It is settled principle of law that bail applications are to be decided tentatively and deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible.

6. From the tentative assessment of the material available on record, the applicants have made out the case for confirmation of their pre-arrest bail, therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants / accused by this court vide order dated 28.12.2021, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

7. Observations made herein above are tentative in nature and will not cause any prejudice to either party at the trial.

JUDGE

Suleman Khan/PA