IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S- 167/2022.

 

Date of hearing

               Order with signature of Judge

 

For hearing of bail application.

 

O R D E R.

29.04.2022.

 

                                      Mr. Sudhamchand alias Sudhamo, Advocate for applicant.

                                Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, D.P.G along with complainant Ghulam Nabi Kalwar.

                                                                   -.-.-.

 

 

 AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., Through this order, I intend to dispose of post arrest bail application filed on behalf of applicant/accused Noor Ahmed son of Ghous Bakhsh, Kalwar in crime No. 75/2022, offence u/s 337-A(ii) PPC  registered at police station ‘A’ Section Ghotki. Prior to this,  applicant/accused had filed such application for grant of post arrest bail but the same was turned down by learned I-Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC Ghotki vide order dated 15.04.2022, hence he has filed instant bail application.

 

2.      The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

 

3.      Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity over ancestral landed property. He further submits that there is inordinate delay of six days in lodging of the FIR for which no plausible explanation has been furnished;  He further submits that actually no incident has taken place but the complainant has lodged a false FIR in order to deprive the accused persons from the landed property; that the alleged offence 337-A(ii) PPC does not come under prehistory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. He lastly prayed for grant of bail.

 

4.      On the other hand learned D.P.G as well as complainant Ghulam Nabi have vehemently opposed for grant of bail on the ground that name of applicant/accused appears in the FIR and he is involved in the commission of alleged offence.

 

5.      I have heard learned counsel for applicant, learned D.P.G for State as well as complainant who is present in Court so also have gone through the material available on record.

 

6.      No doubt the name of applicant/accused transpires in the FIR but the learned counsel for applicant/accused has provided copies some documents to show that the civil litigation between the complainant and applicant/accused is pending before the Court of law hence it will be determined at the time of trial whether applicant/accused has committed the alleged offence or he has been booked by the complainant due to enmity over landed property. Furthermore, alleged offence under section 337-H(ii) PPC is punishable upto five years and the same does not come under prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Investigation has been over and challan has been submitted as such present applicant/accused is no more required for further investigation.

 

7.      In the view of above, learned counsel for applicant has made out the case for grant of bail in view of sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Resultantly the listed bail application is allowed and applicant/accused Noor Ahmed son of Ghous Bux Kalwar is granted post arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. Learned trial Court is at liberty to take action against the applicant/accused, if he misuses the concession of bail.

 

8.      Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant on merits.

 

9.      The aforesaid bail application stand disposed of in the above terms.

 

J U D G E

 

Irfan/P.A



AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., Through this order, I intend to dispose of post arrest bail application filed on behalf of applicant/accused Sagheer Ahmed son of Muhammad Usman bycaste Solangi in crime No.78/2021, offence u/s 458, 364, 120-B, 448, 34 PPC registered at police station Abad District Sukkur. Prior to this, the applicant/accused Sagheer Ahmed had filed such application for grant of post arrest bail but the same was turned down by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II/Gender Based Violence Court, Sukkur vide order dated 27.01.2022, hence he has filed instant bail application.

 

2.       The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

 

3.       Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated by complainant in his further statement which was recorded with the delay of eight months and there is no provision in the law for recording further statement of the complainant. He further contended that only on the basis of CDR, the applicant/accused was found to remain in contact with the alleged abductee and as such the applicant/accused was implicated in this case otherwise he is innocent and lastly prayed for grant of  bail.

 

4.       On the other hand learned counsel for complainant as well as learned Additional P.G vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the applicant/accused and stated that on the basis of further statement of complainant, applicant/accused has been implicated in this case as during investigation the CDR was collected by the police as such he is not entitled for concession of post arrest bail.

 

5.       I have heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned Additional P.G for the State so also have gone through the material available on record.

 

6.       Admittedly the name of present applicant/accused does not transpire in the FIR but subsequently further statement of complainant was recorded with the delay of about eight months and on the basis of CDR collected by the police, the present applicant/accused has been implicated in this case otherwise no evidence has been brought on record. No source has been disclosed by the complainant that who has informed the complainant that the applicant/accused is involved in this case. Mere the allegation against the applicant/accused that he was in contact with the alleged abductee without any material / substance does not mean that he is involved in the commission of offence. Applicant/accused is in Jail, he is no more required for further investigation.

 

7.       In view of above discussion, learned counsel for the applicant/accused has made out a good case for grant of  bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC, hence the applicant/accused namely Sagheer Ahmed son of Muhammad Usman Solangi is granted post arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (One lac) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. Learned trial Court is at liberty to take action against the applicant/accused, if he misuses the concession of bail.

 

8.       Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant on merits.

 

9.       The aforesaid bail application stand disposed of in the above terms.

 

J U D G E

 

Irfan/P.A