IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application Nos. 1135, 1251, 1252, 1253, 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1261, 1287 and 1705 of 2023
Criminal Bail Application No. 1135 of 2023
Javed Ali vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1251 of 2023
Syed Azfar Ali vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1252 of 2023
Abdul Shakoor vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1253 of 2023
Muhammad Kamran vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1254 of 2023
Muhammad Tariq vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1255 of 2023
Rehan Zameer vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1256 of 2023
Muhammad Amir vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1257 of 2023
Muhammad Azhar and others vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1261 of 2023
Rana Muhammad Wajid and others vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1287 of 2023
Wahaj Hussain vs. The State
Criminal Bail Application No. 1705 of 2023
Syed Fahad Asim and others vs. The State
15.08.2023
M/s Noor-ul-Haq Qureshi, Khan Zaman, Maqbool-ur-Rehman, Sathi M. Ishaq, S. K. Lodhi, Khawaja Saiful Islam, Muhammad Iqbal, Zahooruddin Mehsood, Muhammad Ibrar Arain, Rahman Dino Mahesar, Shiraz Ahmed Siddiqui, Zahida Kanwal, Muzafar H. Solangi, Naveed Ashraf, Mehjabeen Rajput, Benish Mehboob, Muhammad Abrar Arain, Muhammad Iqrar, Saima Naseem, advocates for the applicants
Syed Meeral Shah, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh a/w PI Tariq Ali, IO of FIR No.156/2023 & PI Ali Khan Sanjrani, IO of FIR No.211/2023
-------------------------------------------------
Naimatullah Phulpoto, J.- Applicants/accused Javed Ali, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Kamran, Abdul Shakoor, Syed Azfar Ali, Rehan Zameer, Muhammad Amir, Muhammad Azhar, Nawabuddin, Sameer Asim, Rana Muhammad Wajid, Muhammad Shahid, Wahaj Hussain, Syed Fahad Asim, Luqman Khan and Noorul Amin seek post arrest bail in Crime No.211/2023 for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 153, 186, 353, 427 PPC read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. Previously, applicants/accused applied for bail before learned trial Court, the same was rejected vide order dated 20.05.2023. Thereafter, the applicants/accused have approached this Court by filing separate bail applications for the same relief. By this single order, we intend to decide the aforesaid bail applications.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the above bail applications are that SIP Muhammad Ismail along with his subordinate staff was busy in patrolling duty on 09.05.2023. During patrolling, he received spy information that MNA Faheem Khan and other PTI leaders along with 200/300 workers were protesting at Shahrah-e-Faisal on the arrest of Chairman PTI Imran Khan. Police party proceeded there and saw PTI workers were causing damage to the Government properties, attacked upon police party and created panic, FIR was registered on behalf of state vide Crime No. 211/2023 at PS Shah Faisal Colony against leaders of Tehrik-e-Insaf and 200/300 unknown workers for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 153, 186, 353, 427, PPC read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. After usual investigation, interim challan was submitted by the IO under the above referred sections.
3. Learned advocates for the applicants/accused, mainly contended that it was the mob of 200/300 persons who were protesting for the release of Imran Khan, Chairman PTI. It is further argued that the allegations against the applicants/accused are of general in nature; none of the applicants/accused was arrested at the spot; there was no recovery from any of the applicants/accused at the time of arrest. Lastly, it is submitted that applicants/accused are in custody for more than three months and interim challan has already been submitted and the applicants/accused are no more required for investigation. Syed Hafeezuddin, appearing for accused Javed Ali submits that co-accused Javed Ali has been declared innocent by the IO in his interim report and argued that the prosecution case was doubtful. In support of their contentions, reliance is placed on the case of Syed Amanullah Shah vs. the State & another (PLD 1996 SC 241).
4. Syed Meeral Shah, learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh, argued that applicants/accused had caused damage to the Government properties and were arrested during investigation. Lastly, argued that prosecution has collected sufficient material during investigation to connect the accused in this case. Learned Additional P.G. opposed the bail applications.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record.
6. From the perusal of contents of the FIR and 161 Cr.PC statements of the PWs it appears that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the applicants/accused have committed the alleged offences for the reasons that the names of the applicants/accused did not transpire in the FIR. After arrest, identification parade was also not held. Details of damaged properties are not mentioned, there are general allegation against the accused. Yet accused who are nominated in the FIR have not been arrested by the police. Co-accused Javed Ali has been declared innocent by the police in the interim report. Ingredients of the offences in which the applicants have been challaned, yet are to be determined at trial. At this stage, reasonable doubt arises with regard to the participation of the accused persons in the crime. In the case of Syed Amanullah Shah versus the State and another (P L D 1996 Supreme Court 241) the Supreme Court has held that:
5. .. So whenever reasonable doubt arises with regard to the participation of an accused person in the crime or about the truth/probability of the prosecution case and the evidence proposed to be produced in support of the charge, the accused should not be deprived of benefit of bail. Freedom of an individual is a precious right. Personal liberty granted by a Court of competent jurisdiction should not be snatched away from accused unless it becomes necessary to deprive him of his liberty under the law. Where story of prosecution does not appear to be probable, bail may be granted so that further inquiry may be made into guilt of the accused.
7. Investigating Officer submits that applicants/accused are no more required for investigation as interim report has already been submitted before the competent Court of law. In such a situation, it would be better to keep an accused person on bail then in the jail, during the trial.
8. Prima facie, there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the applicants/accused have committed the alleged offences but there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into their guilt. Resultantly, concession of bail is extended to applicants/accused Javed Ali, Muhammad Tariq, Muhammad Kamran, Abdul Shakoor, Syed Azfar Ali, Rehan Zameer, Muhammad Amir, Muhammad Azhar, Nawabuddin, Sameer Asim, Rana Muhammad Wajid, Muhammad Shahid, Wahaj Hussain, Syed Fahad Asim, Luqman Khan and Noorul Amin, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand) each and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
9. Needless to mention here that the observations made herein above are tentative in nature, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same while deciding the case of the applicants/accused on merits.
J U D G E
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS