ORDER SHEET

THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Cr. Misc. Appln.  No. S-209 of 2024

Date	Order with signature of Judge

01. For orders on office Objection.

02. For the hearing of the main case.

08-07-2024

Mr. Saeed Ahmed Bijarani, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Amanullah Luhur, Advocate for the complainant.

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

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

1.         Over-ruled.

2.         The facts, in brief, necessary for the disposal of instant Crl.Misc.Application are that the applicant on having been involved in a murder case was let off by the police on the investigation; he was joined in trial with the issuance of non-bailable warrant against him by learned trial Magistrate; such order he impugned before this Court; consequently, it was modified with the issuance of bailable warrant against him with direction to furnish the requisite surety before learned trial Court, which he did; the case proceeded and was at the verge of its final disposal, the applicant was taken into custody by learned trial Judge vide order dated 15.05.2024, under the deception that he has misused the concession of bail and there is the likelihood of his absconsion; such order the applicant has impugned before this Court by way of instant Crl.Misc.Application .

            It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has never misused the concession of bail and the charge was amended by the learned trial Court on account of the surrender of absconding accused Mumtaz Ali, therefore, the impugned order being illegal is to be set aside by this Court.

            Learned D.P.G for the State did not support the impugned order, however, learned counsel for the complainant by supporting the impugned order has sought the dismissal of instant Crl.Misc.Application by contending that the disposal of the case is defeated by the applicant by causing the surrender of absconding accused Mumtaz Ali.

            Heard arguments and perused the record.

            The moment it is noticed that the concession of bail is being misused by the accused, then he is to be served with notice under Sub Section (5) to Section 497 Cr.PC for recalling such concession; it has not been done in the present case. The applicant has been taken into custody without canceling his bail or bail bond under the deception that he has misused the concession of bail and there is the likelihood of his absconsion; such an exercise is against the mandate contained by Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, which prescribes a fair trial. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside with a direction to the learned trial Court to release the applicant on bail on his furnishing fresh surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to its satisfaction.

            The instant Crl.Misc.Application is disposed of accordingly.  

                                                                                        JUDGE