IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

Crl. Bail Application No.S-177 of 2022

††

DATE OF

HEARING

 

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

 

For hearing of bail application

 

 

 

 

Date of hearing ††† 07.11.2022

 

 

Mr. J.K Jarwar Advocate for applicant

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar Addl. Prosecutor General.

†††††††††††††††††† ***************

 

O R D E R

 

 

Abdul Mobeen Lakho, J;††††††† Through instant bail application, applicant Nazeer and Saddam seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No.45/2022 Police Station, Khanpur for offence punishable under Sections 392, 34 PPC. Earlier his bail application was declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Sukkur vide order dated 22.04.2022.

 

2.†††††† The facts of the prosecution case are mentioned in the FIR attached with the memo of bail application and the same are not to be re-produced in view of the case of Mohammad Shakeel v. The State and others reported as PLD 2014 SC 458.

 

3.†††††† Learned Counsel for applicant contends that the applicants have falsely been involved in this case by the complainant in collusion with Police with malafide intention and ulterior motives; that there is delay in of 15 hours in lodgment of FIR for which no plausible explanation has been furnished by the complainant; that there is dispute arose between complainant and applicant party over occupation of graveyard and complainant being highly influential person got registered three different FIRs, however, no incident as alleged has taken place. He submits that offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C By contending so, he prayed for confirmation of bail. In support of his contention he placed reliance upon the cases of Jan Mohammad alias Janan and others v. The State (2016 P.Cr.LJ Note 42 and Junaid and 2 others v. The State (2000 P.Cr.LJ 1510).

 

4.†††††† Conversely, Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar Additional Prosecutor General has half heartedly oppose the bail on the ground that the dispute arose between applicant and complainant party over occupation of land of graveyard; however, he has drawn attention of this Court towards page-47, the order dated 30.04.2021 passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Sukkur whereby it is mentioned that dispute between both parties is over the matter of plot near the graveyard which comes within the domain of civil nature.

 

 

5.†††††† I have heard arguments of learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record meticulously.

 

6.†††††† On tentative assessment of record it appears that the present applicants alongwith their other companions was allegedly available on road with intention to commit robbery and they aimed their weapon towards complainant and were successful in stopping their motorcycle, snatched the same as well as cash worth Rs.1600/- in different notes. The complainant approached accused persons and they promised him to return the same which to a prudent mind neither appeals nor inspire confidence which needs to be probed further to thrash out any doubtís, which can only be done by way of recording of evidence at trial; however, deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible at bail stage. In my view, until further and proper inquiry carried out, the involvement, if any, extent thereof of the present applicants cannot be ascertained at bail stage therefore, in such circumstances the applicants are successful in making out a case of further inquiry as envisaged under sub-section(2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C in respect of their involvement in the alleged offence. The applicants are regularly attending this Court as well as learned trial Court and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of bail against them therefore, at this stage it would not be proper to recall the interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to them when there is no allegation of misusing the concession of bail against them. Accordingly, instant bail application is hereby allowed. The interim pre-arrest bail already granted to applicants vide order dated 27.04.2022 is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions. The applicants present are directed to continue their appearance before trial Court, till final decision of main case.

 

7.†††††† Needless to mention here that observation made herein above are tentative in nature and trial Court may not get influence of the observation made herein and decide the case on its own merits as per the evidence and the material made available before it.

 

††††††††† Bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.

 

††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††† ††††††††J U D G E

 

 

†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ihsan