IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No.S-74 of 2022

Crl. Bail Application No.S-76 of 2022

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of bail application.

O R D E R.

24-03-2022.

M/s Ghulam Mujtaba Jakhar and Mujahid Ali Jatoi advocates for the applicants/accused.

Mr. Irfan Ahmed advocate Junior Partner of Mr. Irshad Hussain Dharejo advocate for complainant.

Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, DPG for the State.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., By this common order, I intend to dispose of the above mentioned two Bail Applications. Through Crl. Bail Application No.S-74/2022 applicant/accused Aurangzaib Jatoi and through Crl. Bail Application No.S-76/2022, applicant/accused Rashid Ummar, seek pre-arrest bail in one and same Crime No. 12/2021, offence u/s 324, 337H(2), 148, 149 PPC registered at police station Landhyoon, District Khairpur.

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 both the applicants/accused contended that applicants/accused are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant with mala fide intentions and ulterior motives due to dispute over the landed property, which is admitted by the complainant in the FIR; that there is inordinate delay of about 2 days in lodging the FIR and such delay has not been explained; that case of applicants/accused requires for further investigation, therefore, they pray for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail.

4. On the other hand, learned DPG for the State, assisted by junior partner of Mr. Irshad Hussain Dharejo advocate for complainant vehemently opposed for the confirmation of interim pre arrest bail to the applicant/accused on the ground that they are nominated in the FIR with specific role of causing injuries to injured Abdul Majeed Jatoi with intention to commit his murder, hence they are not liable for any kind of relief.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.

6. Perusal of FIR reveals that delay in lodging the FIR has properly been explained by the complainant as after the incident injured was brought at police station, where from the letter was obtained and injured was shifted to Agra Hospital, hence the delay is properly explained by the complainant. The allegation against the applicants/accused is that they being armed with Kalashnikovs and repeater along with co-accused Sajid Jatoi, Zamir Jatoi, Iqbal Jaoti, Gulab Jatoi, Barkat Jatoi and Trooh Jatoi armed with deadly weapons being members of unlawful assembly came at the place of incident, where applicants/accused Rashid Ummar and Orangzeb fired upon Abdul Majeed with their respective weapons with intention to commit his murder, which hit him at his left arm elbow and right thigh and fell down. During the course of investigation, the investigating officer has recorded the 161 Cr.P.C statements of PWs, who have fully supported the version of the complainant. The ocular evidence finds support with the medical evidence. Sufficient material is available on record to connect the applicant/accused with the commission of offence. At bail stage only tentative assessment is to be considered and deeper appreciation of evidence is not warranted by law. Nothing has been brought on the record to shown any ill-will or malafide on the part of the complainant or IO of the case, which is basic requirement for grant of pre-arrest bail. In this regard, I am fortified with the case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan [2019 SCMR 1129] wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held as under:-

''Grant of pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary remedy in criminal jurisdiction; it is diversion of usual course of law, arrest in cognizable cases; a protection to the innocent being hounded on trump up charges through abuse of process of law, therefore a petitioner seeking judicial protection is required to reasonably demonstrate that intended arrest is calculated to humiliate him with taints of mala fide; it is not a substitute for post arrest bail in every run of the mill criminal case as it seriously hampers the course of investigation----the principles of judicial protection are being faithfully adhered to till date, therefore, grant of pre-arrest bail essentially requires considerations of malafide, ulterior motive or abuse of process of law."

7. In view of above discussion, learned counsels for the applicants/accused have failed to make out a good case for grant of pre arrest bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC, therefore, the applicants/accused named above are not entitled for any concession, hence their pre arrest bail applications are rejected and interim bail already granted to them vide orders dated 14-02-2022 are hereby recalled.

8. Needless, to mention that the observations made herein above are tentative in nature and would not prejudice the case of either party at trial. Office is direction to place a signed copy of this Order in captioned connected matter. Office is direct to place a signed copy of this order in the captioned connected Bail Application.

J U D G E

Nasim/P.A