ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl.B.A.No.S-05 of 2024

(Mirzan Brohi Vs. The State)

 

DATE                           ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

 

 

For the hearing of the bail application.

 

05.07.2024.

 

Mr. Mumtaz Ali Brohi, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Shakeel Ahmed G. Ansari, Advocate for the complainant.

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

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

 

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged by the prosecution that the applicant with the rest of the culprits, in furtherance of their common intention, to satisfy their matrimonial dispute with complainant Qalandar Bux, abducted Mst.Zarina and Mst.Ram Bibi, intended to commit their murder; subsequently, they murdered Mst.Zarina and left Mst.Ram Bibi injured in an abandoned place within the jurisdiction of P.S Gaheja, she was taken to Hira Hospital, Sukkur, she by supporting the narration made above died of such injuries, for which the present case was registered.

 

2.        The applicant having been refused post-arrest bail by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, 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 to satisfy his matrimonial dispute with him; the FIR is lodged with a delay of about 18 days and none has seen committing the death of the deceased, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on point of further inquiry, which is opposed by learned DPG for the State and learned counsel for the complainant by contending that the applicant has actively participated in the commission of the incident and now is defeating the trial for one or other reason.

 

4.        Heard arguments and perused the record.

5.        The applicant is named in FIR with an allegation that he with the rest of the culprits went over to the complainant party and then abducted Mst.Zarina and Mst.Ram Bibi, intending to commit their murder and they were murdered. Mst.Ram Bibi before her death by making her statement under section 161 Cr.PC has specifically implicated the applicant and others in the commission of the incident; her statement subject to legal requirement could be treated as a dying declaration. In that situation, it would be premature to say that the applicant is innocent and has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party only to satisfy its matrimonial dispute with him. The delay in lodgment of the FIR is well explained in the FIR itself; the same even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. The circumstances indicate the death of the deceased at the hands of the applicant and others, therefore, it would be immaterial to say that there is no witness to the death of the deceased. A deeper appreciation of the facts and circumstances is not permissible at the bail stage. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence with which he is charged and no case for his release on bail on point of further inquiry is made, most particularly, when he is found defeating the trial.

 

6.        Having discussed above, the instant bail application is dismissed.

 

                                                                                                        JUDGE