ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.B.A.No.S-196 of 2023

(Ali Raza Wadho Vs. The State.)

DATE                         ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of bail application.

01.06.2023.

Mr. Azizullah M.Buriro, Advocate for applicant.

Complainant Ghulam Abbas in person.

Mr.Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

  -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, committed carnal intercourse with PW Sumair, for that the present case was registered. On refusal of pre-arrest bail by learned 4^th Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s.498 Cr.PC.

2.                     It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that he being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about 11 days; the complainant by filing his affidavit has already declared the applicant innocent, therefore,  he is entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide, which is not opposed by learned D.P.G for the State and the complainant in person.

3.                     Heard arguments and perused the record.

4.                     The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about 11 days that too after having recourse under Section 22-A/B Cr.PC; such delay could not be ignored; the case has finally been challaned; and there is no allegation of misusing concession of interim pre-arrest bail on part of the applicant. More-so, the complainant by filing his affidavit has declared the applicant to be innocent. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of malafide.

5.                     In case of Muhammad Najeeb vs. State (2009 SCMR-448), it has been held by the Apex Court that;

“complainant initially had nominated the accused in the FIR but later-on through an affidavit he has expressed his satisfaction with regard to innocence of the accused, the case of the accused was of further enquiry”.

6.                     In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

7.                     The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                           JUDGE