IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No.S-9468 of 2022

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of Bail Application.

O R D E R.

07-03-2022.

Mr. Rukhsar Ahmed Junejo, advocate for applicant.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, APG for the State.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., Through the instant Crl. Bail Application, applicants/accused Mushtaque Ali and Arbelo both bycaste Bhanbhro seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 148/2021, offence u/s 147, 148, 149, 324, 504, 506/2, 114, 337F(iii) PPC registered at police station Salehpat, District Sukkur. Prior to this, the applicants filed such application, but the same was turned down by learned V-Additional Sessions Judge Sukkur vide order dated 18-02-2022, hence this 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 the applicants/accused submit that applicants/accused are innocent and they 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 has been admitted by the complainant in the FIR; that there is inordinate delay of about 02 months in lodging the FIR and such long delay has not been explained by the complainant; that prior to this, applicant Arbelo has lodged the FIR No. 48/2021 at PS Salehpat against the complainant, therefore in order to pressurize the applicants/accused party, the complainant has lodged this false FIR; that the injured sustained by the complainant/injured is self suffered injury and according to medical report there is blackening and charring over the injury; that the applicants/accused have joined the investigation and they have not misused the concession of interim pre-arrest bail, therefore, he pray for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail.

4. On the other hand learned APG for the State has opposed for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants/accused on the ground that as per medical certificate, the injury No.1 & 2 of the injured have been declared as 337F(iii) PPC, which are punishable up to three years.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants/accused, learned APG for the State and have gone through the material available on record.

6. Admittedly, there is inordinate delay of about 02 months in lodging the FIR and such long delay has not been properly explained by the complainant. According to provisional medical certificate of injured Qadir Bux, issued by medical officer, Taluka Hospital Rohri, there is blackening and charring over the injures and as per contention that of learned counsel for the applicants/accused, that the injuries sustained by the injured are self suffered. The injuries sustained by the injured have been declared by the medical officer as Ghayr-e-Jaifah Mutalahima 337F(iii) PPC, which is punishable up to three years. Further the applicants/accused have not repeated the fire shot, from which it could be presumed that they have made the fires upon the injured with intention to commit his murder and the injury sustained by the injured is also on non vital part of the body. Moreover, record reflects that prior to this, the applicant/accused Arbelo has lodged FIR No. 48/2021 against the present complainant, injured Qadir Bux and others and in order to convert such dispute into counter version, the complainant has lodged this FIR. Learned counsel for the applicants/accused has also pleaded malafide on the part of complainant to falsely involve them over the landed property. The case has been challaned and applicants/accused are no more required for further investigation.

7. In view of above discussion, learned counsel for the applicants/accused has made out a good case for confirmation of bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC, hence the instant bail application is allowed and interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused is confirmed on same terms and condition. Learned trial Court is at liberty to take action against the applicants/accused, if they misuse 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.

J U D G E

Nasim/P.A