ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-458 of 2021

Date	Order with signature of Judge

Applicants: Tariq and Allahyar, through

Mr. Muhammad Aslam M. Shahani,

Advocate

Complainant: Nemo

State: Through Mr.Khalil Ahmed Maitlo, DPG

Date of hearing: 16.08.2021

Dated of order: 16.08.2021

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Applicants/accused Tariq son of Allahyar and Allahyar son of Fazli, are seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No.140/2021, registered at Police Station ‘A’ Section Ghotki, under sections 337-F(v), 337-A(i), 337-F(i) and 34 PPC. Their earlier pre-arrest bail plea was declined by the learned I-Additional Sessions Judge (MCTC) Ghotki, vide order dated 28.06.2021. After rejection of their bail application, they approached this court for the same relief.

2. As per FIR, the allegations against the applicants is that applicant Tariq caused lathi blow to Nadir Ali and applicant Allahyar caused lathi blow to Mst. Allah Bachai.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is delay of 24 days in registration of the FIR, which has not been explained by the complainant; that the injuries caused by the applicants are on non-vital part of the injured Nadir Ali and Mst. Allah Bachai and punishment for such injury is up to five years which does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C; that the applicants have been implicated with malafide intention. Lastly he prayed that the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants may be confirmed.

4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General conceded for confirmation of pre-arrest in view of the facts that the punishment provided for the offence is up to five years and does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.

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 24 days in registration of FIR, which has not been properly explained. Further the offence does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Grant of bail in these cases is rule and refusal is an exception. However, strong reasons for refusal are required.

7. In view of the above coupled with the no objection given by learned DPG for the state, I am of the view that the applicants have made out the case for confirmation of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants / accused by this court vide order dated 27.07.2021, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

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