ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr.B.A.No.S-206 of 2023

(Khadim Hussain Vs. The State)

 

DATE                           ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

 

 

For hearing of bail application.

 

01.06.2023.

 

 

Mr. Shahbaz Ali Brohi, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Abdul Rehman Bhutto, Advocate for complainant.

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

                                                 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

IRSHAD ALI SHAH J;- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention besides committing murder of Zahid Ahmed, caused fire shot injuries to PWs Muhammad Azeem and Mst.Dhayani with intention to commit their murder and then went away by causing lathi blow to PW Abdul Qayoom and making aerial firing to create harassment and insulting complainant party, for that the present case was registered. On refusal of post-arrest bail by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s. 497 Cr.PC.

2.        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the name of the applicant does not transpire in the FIR and no effective role in commission of the incident is attributed to him, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry, which is not opposed by learned D.P.G for the State. However, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed to release of applicant on bail by contending that his name was disclosed by the complainant subsequently by making further statement and he is vicariously liable for commission of the incident.  

3.        Heard arguments and perused the record.

4.        The name and description of the applicant are not appearing in FIR though it has been lodged with delay of about one day; it was disclosed subsequently by the complainant by making further statement, which was made with delay of about ten days to FIR; the further statement made by the complainant could hardly be treated as part of FIR; even otherwise,  no effective role in commission of the incident is attributed to the applicant, therefore, vicarious liability on his part, if any, would call for determination at trial; the case has finally been challaned and there is no apprehension of tampering with the evidence on the part of applicant. In these circumstances, a case for release of applicant on bail on point of further inquiry is made out.

5.        In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs.200,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. 

6.        The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                                      JUDGE