ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-580 of 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

13.01.2022

                        Mr. Abdul Waheed Rajput, Advocate for the applicants.

Complainant Abdul Razzaque in person.

Mr. Abdul Ghaffar, A.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits,  in furtherance of their common intention caused hatchets and dandas blows to complainant Abdul Razzaque and his brother PW Abdul Hameed and then went away by insulting and threatening them of murder, for that the present case was registered. 

                        The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned           1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Larkana, have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498-A Cr.PC.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the police; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day and the offence alleged against them is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC; therefore, they are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

                        Learned A.P.G for the State and the complainant in person have record no objection to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants by contending that the parties have settled their dispute outside of the Court. By stating so, they caused filing of affidavit of the complainant to such effect.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one day; such delay could not be overlooked. The offence alleged against the applicants is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. The parties are already disputed over the landed property. The case has finally been challaned and the applicants have joined the trial. In these circumstances, the applicants are found entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

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

                        The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E