ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr. B. A. No. 841 of 2022

(Muhammad Asif @ Mujahid Masood vs. The State)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(s)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For hearing of bail application

------------------------------

19.07.2022

Mr. Amer Pervaiz, advocate for the applicant

Mr. Faheem Hussain Panhawar, D.P.G for the State

-------------------------------------------

Irshad Ali Shah J.—It is alleged that applicant with rest of the culprits in furtherance of their common intention fired and injured complainant Muhammad Ishaque, his son Muhammad Ali and brother Sirajuddin with intention to commit their murder, eventually Muhammad Ali died of such injuries, for that the present case was registered.

The applicant on having been refused bail by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Karachi West has sought for the same from this court by way of instant application u/s 497 Cr.P.C.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police on the basis of his own statement, otherwise, he has nothing to do with the alleged incident, therefore, is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry.

None has come forward to advance arguments on behalf of the complainant. However, learned DPG for the State has opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that he is abettor of the alleged offence.

Heard arguments and perused the record.

Name and description of the applicant are not appearing in FIR though it is lodged with delay of about one day; no identification parade of the applicant has been conducted through Magistrate. In that situation, the involvement of the applicant in commission of incident as abettor on the basis of his own statement before police, which is not admissible in evidence. The case has finally be challaned and there is no apprehension of tampering with evidence on the part of applicant. In these circumstances, a case for release of applicant on bail on point of further inquiry obviously is made out.

In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail, subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees Five Lac Only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E