ORDER
SHEET
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Bail
Application No.S-412 of 2021
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
Applicants: Yar Muhammad @
Yaral, through
Mr.
Shah Nawaz Waseer, Advocate
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: Applicant/accused Yar Muhammad @ Yaral son of
Nabi Bux Khan, Pathan, is seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No.29/2019, registered
at Police Station Belo Mirpur, District Ghotki, under sections 452, 365-B, 457
and 382 PPC. His earlier pre-arrest bail plea was declined by the learned III-Additional
Sessions Judge, Mirpur Mathelo, vide order dated 26.06.2021. After rejection of
his bail application, he approached this court for the same relief.
2.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the neither the name of
applicant transpires in the FIR nor any specific role has been assigned to him;
that the present applicant was involved after recording statement of Mst. Rabia
u/s 164 Cr.P.C on 01.11.2019 before learned I-Civil Judge & Judicial
Magistrate Mirpur Mathelo; that in her statement she has not leveled the
allegation of kidnapping or of zina against the present applicant and said
statement was recorded after two months of the incident; that the applicant was
malafidely arrayed in the case. Lastly he
prayed that the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant may be
confirmed.
3.
Learned Deputy Prosecutor General has opposed the confirmation of interim
pre-arrest bail on the ground that the present applicant was arrayed as an
accused by Mst. Rabia, who in her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C stated that the
present applicant along with Asghar forcibly broken the lock and took
Rs.35000/- and other golden ornaments, therefore the applicant is not entitled
for any relief.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned DPG for the
State and perused the material available on record with their able assistance.
5. Admittedly the applicant has not been
nominated in the FIR and no role has been assigned to him. There is no evidence
that how Mst. Rabia approached the police to get recorded her statement u/s 164
Cr.P.C. Further, in her said statement, she has stated that on 27.10.2019 she
has left the house of accused persons and came at police Station and through
her counsel she got recorded her statement. It transpires from her version that
her 164 Cr.P.C statement was recorded after consultation and deliberation. It
is settled principle of law that bail application is to be decided tentatively
and deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible under the law.
6. From
the tentative assessment of the material available on record, I am of the view
that the applicant has made out the case for confirmation of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly,
the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant / accused by this
court vide order dated 02.07.2021, 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.
8. Instant Criminal Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms.
JUDGE
Suleman Khan/PA