IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

Cr. Bail Appln. No.S-119   of  2023

Abid Hussain Gopang & another

Vs

The State

Applicants          :   Through Mr. Ameer Ali Sanjrani Advocate.

State                 :   Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Additional

                              Prosecutor General. 

Complainant      :   Abdul Jabbar Gopang Through Mr. Ali Hassan

                              Narejo Advocate.  

Date of hearing      :  13.07.2023.

Date of Decision    :  13.07.2023.

O R D E R.

                        Applicants Abid Hussain son of Mureed and Meer Mohammad son of Sher Mohammad, both by caste Gopang, seek bail in Crime No.38/2022, registered at Police Station Naudero, District Larkana, for offence under Sections 364, 302, 201, 34, PPC.

            2.         The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and crime report, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with the bail application, hence needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

            3.         Per learned Counsel, though the applicants are nominated in the FIR, but no specific role has been assigned against them; that the role assigned against accused Meer Mohammad is general in nature; that the applicants are in jail, hence they are no more required for further investigation. 

            4.         On the other hand, learned Counsel for the complainant, vehemently opposed the bail application, on the grounds that names of applicants Abid Hussain and Meer Mohammad appear in the FIR and they are vicariously liable for commission of offence, as such, they are not entitled for grant of bail.

            5.         Learned Addl. P.G. also opposed the grant of bail.

            6.         Heard learned Counsel and perused the record.

            7.         No doubt the names of applicant/accused Abid Hussain appears in the FIR, but no specific role is assigned against him to connect him with the commission of alleged offence. In the case of Qurban Ali v. the State 2017 SCMR 279, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan granted bail to the accused, who were not attributed any overt act during occurrence except the role of raising Lalkara. In such circumstances trial Court has to determine after recording pro and contra evidence whether the accused person was vicarious liable for the act of co-accused. Case requires further enquiry.

            8.         In another case of Mumtaz Hussain & 5 others v. The State 1996 SCMR 1125, the bail was granted to accused on the ground that despite being alleged armed with deadly weapons they have caused simple injuries to the prosecution witnesses, as such, their case requires further enquiry.

            9.         Admittedly, mere presence has been shown at the place of incident against the present applicant/accused Abid Hussain. Learned Counsel for the applicants/accused also pleaded malafide on the part of complaint that due to enmity he has been implicated in this case. Learned Counsel for the applicants/accused made out case for grant of bail to the extent of applicant/accused Abid Hussain. He is enlarged on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

            10.       So far case of applicant/accused Meer Mohammad is concerned, his name is appearing in the FIR with specific role that he along with co-accused Saeed Ahmed given dagger blows to the deceased, resultantly he has received 10 dagger blows.  In view of the above, applicant/accused Meer Mohammad is not entitled for concession of bail, as such, bail application to the extent of accused Meer Mohammad is dismissed. 

            11.       The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, which shall not prejudice the case of either party at trial.            

                                                                                                JUDGE

Qazi Tahir PA/*