ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-694 of 2020

Date	Order with signature of Judge

Applicants: Zaheer Abbas and others through

Mr. Ali Gul Abbasi, Advocate

Complainant: Ali Gul Abbasi through

Mr. Ghulam Murtaza Korai, Advocate

State: Through Mr.Shafi Muhammad Mahar,

Deputy Prosecutor General

Date of hearing: 20.09.2021

Dated of order: 20.09.2021

O R D E R

Zulfiqar Ali Sangi, J: Through captioned bail application, Applicants/ accused Zaheer Abbas, Aurangzeb, Abdul Kareem all sons of Nizamuddin, Sohail Ahmed, Shoaib Ahmed both sons of Ghulam Rasool and Saleem son of Abdul Haleem, all by caste Kalhoro, are seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No.79/2020, registered at Police Station Baiji Shareef, under sections 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(v), 337-F(i), 337-L(ii),147, 148, 149, 114, 504, 447, 506/2 and 324 PPC. Their earlier pre-arrest bail plea was declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pano Aqil, vide orders dated 13.11.2020, as such, they approached to this court for same relief.

2. As per FIR, the allegations against the applicants are that they caused lathi blows to complainant Ali Gul and his son Ayaz Gul on different parts of their body.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is delay of 06 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 and punishment for such injuries is up to five years which do not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C; that there are contradictions in between ocular evidence and the medical evidence; 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 counsel for the complainant and learned DPG 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.

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 six days in registration of FIR. As per medical certificates the injuries are punishable up to five years as such 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. So far section 324 PPC is concerned, its applicability 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 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 18.11.2020, 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.

JUDGE

Suleman Khan/PA