ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

Crl. Bail Appln. No.S-551  of 2023.

Date                           Order with signature of Hon’ble Judge

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For  hearing of Bail Application.

Mr. Ashfaque Hussain Abro, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Imran Mubeen Khan, Asst. Prosecutor General.

Date of Hearing      : 16.10.2023.

O R D E R

                        Applicant Abid Ali Bakhrani has filed this application seeking post arrest bail in crime No.63 of 2023, registered under sections 324, 353, 402, 399 and 35, PPC at PS B-Section, Thul. Earlier, his application seeking bail was dismissed on 18-8-2023 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thul.

2.         The background to this case is that on 02-8-2023, A.S.I. Imdad Ali Lashari lodged the aforementioned F.I.R. narrating therein that a police party led by him being on patrol duty during snap checking clashed with 09 armed culprits including the present applicant, who had emerged there on three motorcycles, and after cross-firing for about 15 minutes, apprehended applicant Abid Ali along with an unlicensed gun.

3.         I have heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Asst. P.G and with their able assistance also perused the record.

4.         Learned counsel for the applicant has focused his argument on the fact that the alleged encounter never actually happened and that it is unbelievable that in spite of the shoot out between the police and the armed accused persons for 15 minutes, no police officer received an injury. He submitted that the applicant had been falsely involved in the case and that the applicant had no crime record.

5.         Conversely, the learned Asst. P.G argued that the police officials had no enmity with the applicant to falsely involve him in this case.

6.         Surprisingly, despite cross firing for 15 long minutes between nine culprits and six police personnel, nobody from either side is shown to have sustained any injury or say the least any scratch to attract Section 324, PPC and even the police mobile van was not hit by any bullet. As far as Section 353, PPC is concerned, same due to non-availability of any injury sustained by the member of either party, is yet to be established by the prosecution.  As far Section 399 read with 402, PPC are concerned, as pointed out by learned Asst. P.G. no criminal case has been shown registered against the present applicant; and even on the night of alleged incident falling between 2^nd and 3^rd August, 2023 no any offence was committed and/or reported within the jurisdiction of PS B-Section, Thul, therefore, basic ingredients for applying Sections 399 read with 402, PPC are also lacking and yet to be established by the prosecution after recording evidence of its witnesses. This fact alone would form the basis of granting bail to the applicant. Whether the police encounter was a genuine one is yet to be proved at trial after evidence is led. Upon a tentative assessment of the record, it appears that the case against the applicant requires further enquiry as envisaged under sub-section (2) to Section 497, Cr.P.C, therefore, it would be safe to enlarge the applicant on bail pending trial. The bail application therefore is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.100,000/- with one surety and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

                                                                                                                            JUDGE

Qazi Tahir/*