IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Cr. Bail Application No. 2236 of 2023

(Umar Khan Vs. The State)

Cr. Bail Application No. 2336 of 2023

(Abdul Momin Vs. The State)

Mr. Zubair Ahmed Samejo Advocate for the Applicants

Complainant Tariq Shah present in person

Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh for the State along with SIP Rasheed Ahmed, I.O. and SIP Abdul Qayyum of P.S Manghopir

Date of hearing                      :                       10.11.2023

.-.-.-.-.-.

O R D E R

Omar Sial, J.:  On 12.10.2022, Tariq Shah saw on social media a photo of a dead body, whom Tariq identified as his brother Sabir Shah. F.I.R. No. 784 of 2022 was registered under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. against unidentified persons. It seems that the police could not make any meaningful headway in solving the case; consequently, it recommended that the case be disposed of in A-Class.

2.         For some as yet unexplainable reason, on 25.08.2023, Tariq Shah recorded a statement with the police in which he accused Abdul Momin (the deceased’s brother-in-law) and Umar Khan (a person with whom the deceased had an unpleasant relationship) of committing the murder. On 10.09.2023, two persons, Rashid Ali and Arif, who were well acquainted with the dead and the two accused, recorded statements in which they said that they had seen the murder on 11.10.2022.

3.         Abdul Momin and Umar Khan were arrested on 26.08.2023 and applied for bail before the learned 12^th Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi West. Their respective applications were dismissed on 04.10.2022.

4.         I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Prosecutor General. The complainant was present in person; however, he did not wish to engage a counsel to represent him. My observations and findings are as follows.

5.         I find it highly odd that despite a substantial delay in registering the F.I.R., the complainant did not tell the police the entire story, which he seemed to remember after ten months. What he recorded were not events that he had recently discovered, but in fact, he already knew them when the murder was committed and the F.I.R. was registered. Similarly, the two supposed eye-witnesses, who emerged nearly eleven months later, gave a rather weak reason why they did not tell Tariq Shah’s family or the police what they had seen on 11.10.2022. They said they were afraid. They seemed well acquainted with the two applicants and the deceased, as they specifically named them in their statements, so they cannot claim that because they were unaware of who the shooters and the dead were, they did not tell anyone. What I find confusing at this stage is that despite the two supposed eyewitnesses giving the reason that they were afraid and hence did not tell anybody for eleven months, the complainant, during the hearing of this application, when asked about the delay in recording statements, said that he had gone each day to the investigating officer to ask him to record the statements, but that the investigating officer declined to do so.  I find the statements recorded by Tariq Shah and those recorded by Rashid Ali and Arif suspicious upon a tentative assessment. In my view, the statements of the supposed two eyewitnesses, being the only evidence against the applicants make the case against them one of further inquiry.

6.         Given the above, interim pre arrest bail granted to the Applicant Umar Khan is confirmed on same terms and conditions. The applicant Abdul Momin is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his giving surety of Rs. 100,000 and P.R. Bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

JUDGE