ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.B.A.No.S-182 of 2024

(Rashid Ali Chandio Vs. The State)

 

DATE                           ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

 

 

For the hearing of the bail application.

 

04.07.2024.

 

Mr. Muhammad Sharif R. Awan, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Farooq Ahmed Gaad, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G for the State.

                                                 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

 

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with the rest of the culprits, after having formed an unlawful assembly and in the prosecution of its common object besides causing the murder of Sajjad Hussain by causing him hatchet and lathi blows, also caused hatchet and lathi blows to complainant Frooq Ahmed, PWs Ghulam Sikandar and Khalid Hussain, intending to commit their murder too and then went away by making aerial firing to create harassment, for which the present case was registered.

 

2.        The applicant having been refused post-arrest bail by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Mehar, has sought the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s. 497 Cr. PC.

 

3.        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party to satisfy its dispute with him over the property and the role attributed to him in commission of the incident is only to the extent of causing lathi blow to PW Ghulam Sikandar, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry, which is opposed by learned D.PG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant by contending that the applicant has actively participated in the commission of the incident.

 

4.        Heard arguments and perused the record.

5.        The FIR of the incident has been lodged with a delay of one day; such delay could not be overlooked. The role attributed to the applicant in the commission of the incident is only to the extent that he caused lathi blow to PW Ghulam Sikandar; such injury is not falling within prohibitory clause, whether he participated in the commission of the incident with vicarious liability, it requires determination at trial. The parties admittedly are disputed over the property. The case has finally been challaned and there is no likelihood of absconsion or tampering with the evidence on the part of applicant. In these circumstances, a case for release of applicant on bail on the point of further inquiry is made out.

 

 

 

6.        Under the discussed circumstances, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 

 

7.        The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                                        JUDGE