ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 551 of 2023

(Faisal, Fahad and Abdul Hameed versus The State)

Date Order with signature of Judges

For hearing of bail application

15.06.2023

Mr. Ahteshamullah Khan advocate for the applicants

Ms. Rubina Qadir, D.P.G.

M/s Muhammad Aslam Bhutta, M. Zareef Khan and Mazhar Larik advocates for the complainant

-----------------------------------

It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of its common object beside committing murder of Saleem, caused hockey and dandas blows to P.W Sabir with intention to commit his murder, for that the present case was registered. The applicants on having been refused by learned II-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under Section 498 Cr.P.C.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant; the FIR of the incident is lodged with delay of about one day and there are general allegations of the incident, therefore, the applicants are entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

Learned DPG for the state and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants by contending that they have actively participated in the commission of incident.

Heard arguments and perused the record.

The complainant is not an eye witness to the incident; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about 01 day; The 161 Cr.P.C statement of P.W/injured Sabir has also been recorded with further delay of one day even to FIR; such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. There is general allegation of incident. The case has finally been challaned and there is no apprehension of tampering with the evidence on the part of the applicants. In these circumstances, the case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants on the point of further inquiry and malafide obviously is made out.

In the case of Meeran Bux vs. The State and another (PLD 1989 S.C 347), it has been held by apex Court that:

“Since the appellant remained on bail for more than one year before the bail was cancelled by the High Court without abusing the concession of bail in any manner and the reason given by the learned Session Judge for granting pre‑arrest bail that the injury was on non‑vital part of the body of 'the deceased i.e. thigh and was simple, was not without foundation, we would, therefore, in the circumstances, set aside the impugned order of the High Court and restore the order of the Sessions Judge granting the pre‑arrest bail.”

In these circumstances, a case of grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants on point of further inquiry and malafide is made out.

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

Instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E