ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S-670 of 2022

(Lal Bux @ Lalu Mahar Vs. The State)

1. For Orders on office objection.

2. For hearing of Bail Application.

06-03-2023.

Mr. Shabbir Ali Bozdar, advocate for applicant.

Mr. Bakhshan Khan Mahar, advocate for complainant.

Mr. Shafi Muhammad Mahar, Deputy P.G for the State

>>>>>…<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J;- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits during course of robbery, caused lathi injuries to complainant Muhammad Hayat, for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant on having been refused bail by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Ghotki, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Bail Application u/s 497 Cr.P.C.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about 07 days and injuries sustained by the complainant have not been attributed to the applicant; therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry.

4. Learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed for grant of post arrest bail to the applicant by contending that co-accused Janu and Jani have already been refused pre-arrest bail by this Court and applicant has remained in absconsion for considerable period.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The principle for grant of pre and post arrest bail are different. Initially the incident was recorded in Roznamcha, it does not contain the name and description of any of culprit involved in the incident. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with the delay of about 07 days, such delay having not been explained by the complainant plausibly. The allegation of robbery and causing of lathi blows to complainant is attributed to co-accused Janu and Jani. In that situation the involvement of the applicant in commission of incident on point of conjoint liability obviously is calling for determination at trial; the case has finally been challaned and there is no apprehension of tempering with the evidence on the part of the applicant. In these circumstance; a case for release of the applicant on bail, on point of further inquiry obviously is made out.

7. In case of Mitho Pitafi vs. The State (2009 SCMR 299), it has been held by Honourable Apex Court that;

“----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---It is well-settled principle of law that bail can be granted if an accused has good case for bail on merit and mere absconsion would not come in way while granting the bail.”

8. In view of above the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in sum of Rs.50,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

9. The instant Crl. Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

Judge

Nasim/P.A