ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-04 of 2021

 

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

           

 

Applicants:                                 Yar Muhammad, Mukhtiar, Riaz

                                                  Ahmed and Maqbool Hussain

                                                  through Mr. Amanullah G. Malik,

                                                  Advocate

 

Complainant:                             Sahib Ali

                                                  through Mr. Rukhsar Ahmed Junejo,

                                                  Advocate

 

State:                                         Through Mr.Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, DPG

 

Date of hearing:                         09.08.2021

 

Dated of order:                           09.08.2021

                                                 

 

O R D E R

 

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J:  Applicants/accused Yar Muhammad son of Bahawal Din, Mukhtiar son of Bahawal Din, Riaz Ahmed son of Muhammad Yousif and Maqbool Husain son of Riaz Ahmed are seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No.38/2020, registered at Police Station Mubarakpur, under sections 324, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 311, 504, 506/2, 114, 147 and 148 PPC. Their earlier bail applications were declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pano Aqil, vide orders dated 31.12.2020. After rejection of their bail applications, they approached this court for the same relief.

2.           The facts of the case are mentioned in the FIR and copy of the same is annexed with the memo of bail application as annexure-A, therefore, there is no need to reproduce the facts.

3.           Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the applicants have falsely been involved by the complainant. He next contended that there is delay of two days in registration of FIR, which has not been explained by the complainant. He further contended that prior to this FIR, two FIRs bearing FIR No.5/2020 and FIR No.19/2020 have been registered by the applicants` party at PS Mubarakpur against the complainant party on 10.02.2020, and 27.05.2020 respectively, thereafter present FIR was managed to falsely implicate the applicants. He further contended that as per final medical certificate the injuries sustained by the complainant party are punishable up to five years and same do not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. He also contended that accused Riaz Ahmed, Maqbool Hussain and Mureed Hussain were let off by the police during the investigation, however they were joined by the learned Magistrate. In support of his contentions learned counsel for the applicants placed reliance on the case of Tariq Bashir v. The State PLD 1995 SC 34. He prayed that the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants may be confirmed.

4.           Mr. Rukhsar Ahmed Junejo Advocate for the complainant and Mr. Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, Deputy Prosecutor General opposed the confirmation of pre-arrest bail on the ground that the applicants were nominated in the FIR with specific roles, however they conceded that the injuries  caused to the complainant party are punishable up to five years.  They further submit that charge has been framed and case is fixed before the trial court for recording evidence of prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled for the confirmation of their pre-arrest bail.

 

5.           I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record with their able assistance.

 

6.           Admittedly there is delay of two days in registration of FIR, though the complainant furnished some explanation but on query learned counsel for the complainant and the prosecutor are unable to furnish NC report or any evidence to establish that the applicants were named when injured were referred to the Doctor for treatment. As per medical certificate the injuries are punishable up to five years and  strong reasons for rejection of bail are required in the case where the offence do not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Applicability of section 324 PPC is to be considered by the trial court after recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses. It is settled principle of law that bail applications are to be decided tentatively and deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible.

 

7.           From the tentative assessment of the material available on record, the applicants  make 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 04.01.2021, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within three months with compliance report through Additional Registrar of this court.

 

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

 

9.       Instant Criminal Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms.

 

                                                                             JUDGE

 

Suleman Khan/PA