IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT
Crl. Bail Appln. No. S- 139 of 2021.
Applicants: 1. Muhammad Nawaz Khan and 2. Imtiaz Ali, through Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, Advocate.
Complainant: Umar Wahid, through Mr. Muhammad Ashique Dhamraho, Advocate.
Respondent: The State, through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General.
Date of Hearing: 20.09.2021.
Date of Order: 20.09.2021.
O R D E R
Abdul Mobeen Lakho, J: Through this application, applicants Muhammad Nawaz Khan son of Noor Muhammad alias Noor Khan Shaikh and Imtiaz Ali son of Muhammad Usman Shaikh are seeking their admission to pre-arrest bail in Crime No.24/2021 of Police Station Market, Larkana, registered for offences punishable under Sections 458, 427, 504, 114, 147 and 148 P.P.C. Earlier, similar bail plea of the applicants was declined by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, vide order dated 01.04.2021.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 27.3.2021 complainant Umar Wahid Araine lodged report with P.S Market Larkana, stating therein that, at about 08.00 p.m of 27.3.2021 when complainant alongwith his witnesses was available in Shaikh Bungalow about 25 persons entered bungalow, out of them they identified accused Muhammad Nawaz, Imtiaz Ali and Nizamuddin while rest were not known to them; all of them were having “lathis” in their hands and on coming accused Muhammad Nawaz Shaikh instigated rest of accused to kill complainant party, to which the accused persons caused damaged in the bungalow and since complainant party entreated accused persons, they left the scene while abusing.
Learned counsel for the applicants mainly contended that, since there are counter cases between the same parties, and since applicants have joined the trial and are regularly attending the trial Court; no purpose would be served if the applicants are refused bail and put behind bars and that the complainant has no objection for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail to the applicants, therefore, the interim pre-arrest bail of the applicants may be confirmed.
Learned Advocate for complainant affirms contention of learned counsel for the applicants and extends no objection to confirmation of pre-arrest bail in favor of the applicants.
On other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General appearing for the State does not controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants and concedes for confirmation of interim bail in view of no objection extended by learned Advocate for complainant.
Accordingly, in view of no objection extended by the learned Advocate for complainant as well as learned D.P.G. appearing for the State; instant bail application stands allowed. Consequently, interim pre-arrest bail already granted to applicants vide Order dated 05.04.2021, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.