IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.1484 of
2023
Criminal Bail Application No.1485 of
2023
Before:
Mr. Justice
Naimatullah Phulpoto
Justice Ms.
Kausar Sultana Hussain
-----------------------------------------------
05.09.2023
Mr. Mumtaz Ahmed
Soomro, advocate for applicant
Mr. Ali Haider
Saleem, Additional Prosecutor General
Inspector/IO Sabz
Ali Khan of P.S. Frere
-------------------------------------------------
O R D E R
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Applicant/accused Ibrahim son of Haji Mohib seeks post
arrest bail in Crime No.71/2023,
registered at P.S. Pak Colony, Karachi for offence under Sections 147, 148,
149, 353, 324, 34, PPC read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and in
Crime No.72/2023, registered at P.S.
Pak Colony, for offence under Section 23(1)(a) of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013.
Applicant/accused applied for bail before the trial Court, the same was
rejected vide order dated 27.06.2023.
Since both the bail applications arise out of the same incident, we intend to
decide the same by this common order.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the
FIR(s) are that on 17.03.2023, SIP
Raja Waheed Awan along with subordinate staff left police station, when the police
party reached near Gutter Baagicha, Musharaf Park, Hasrat Mohani Colony,
Karachi, it is alleged that there was police encounter. It is alleged that
applicant/accused sustained firearm injury during encounter and one accused,
namely, Akhtiar had also received firearm injuries and he succumbed to
injuries. FIRs of the incident was lodged vide Crime No.71/2023 at P.S. Pak Colony, Karachi for offence under
Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 324, 34, PPC read with Section 7 of the
Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and Crime
No.72/2023 for offences under Section 23(1)(a) of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013.
After usual investigation, challan was submitted before learned Administrative
Judge, Anti-Terrorism Courts, Karachi.
3. Learned advocate for applicant mainly contended that there
was a cross firing from both the sides with the sophisticated weapons, not a
single injury was caused to any of the police officials or any scratch to the
police mobile; that the prosecution story was doubtful; that unlicensed weapon
has been foisted upon the applicant; that the case against the
applicant/accused required further inquiry. In support of contentions, reliance
has been placed on the case of Syed Amanullah Shah vs. the State & another
(PLD 1996 SC 241).
4. Mr. Ali Haider Saleem, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh, submits
that the applicant sustained injury and co-accused Akhtiar died at the spot in
police encounter. He opposed the bail applications.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the relevant record.
6. It
appears that there was a police encounter with sophisticated weapons. Apparently,
it is unbelievable and unnatural that not a single injury or scratch was caused
to any of the police officials or police mobile. On the other hand, firearm
injury was caused to applicant/accused and co-accused Akhtiar died at the spot.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant/accused that police encounter
was fake and the prosecutor story is doubtful. 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 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. Reliance
is placed on the case of Syed Amanullah Shah versus the State and another (P L D 1996 Supreme Court 241).
7. Prima facie, there are no reasonable
grounds for believing that the applicant/accused has committed the alleged
offences but there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into his guilt.
Resultantly, concession of bail is extended to applicant/accused Ibrahim son of Haji Mohib in main case
bearing Crime
No.71/2023, registered at P.S. Pak
Colony, Karachi for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 324, 34, PPC
read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the
sum of Rs.200,000/- (Rupees Two hundred thousand) and in the offshoot/connected
case bearing Crime No.72/2023
for offences under Section 23(1)(a) of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013, in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Hundred Thousand) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court.
8. 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 applicant/accused on merits.
J U D G E
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS