IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No. 2000 of
2023
|
DATE |
ORDER
WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE. |
Present: Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Justice Mrs. Kausar Sultana Hussain
For hearing of bail application
11.10.2023
Mr.
Muhammad Ilyas Awan advocate for the applicant
Ms. Rahat Ahsan Addl. P.G along with I.O
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Naimatullah Phulpoto, J.- Raheem-ul-Haque applicant
seeks post arrest bail in Crime No. 56/2023 for offences under Sections 11-F,
11-H, 11-N of ATA 1997 registered at P.S CTD, Karachi. Prior to this,
applicant/accused applied for post arrest bail before learned Judge, ATC No.XII,
the same was rejected vide order dated 29.08.2023.
2. Mr. Muhammad Ilyas Awan advocate for
the applicant mainly contended that donation book of the proscribed
organization has been foisted upon the applicant; that ingredients of offence
are not attracted in the case. Lastly, it is submitted that applicant/accused is
in judicial custody since more than 06 months and is no more required for
investigation. In support of his contentions, he relied upon case of Muhammad Junaid-ur-Rehman vs. The State and
another (2020 P.Cr.L.J 310).
3. Ms. Rahat Ahsan, Addl. P.G argued that donation
book of the proscribed organization was recovered from the possession of
applicant which connects the applicant/accused with the offence alleged against
him and the applicant/accused has also admitted his guilt before the I.O. Addl.
P.G opposed the bail application.
4. I.O present before the Court submits
that except donation book no other incriminating material was recorded against
him. I.O submits that mobile phone recovered from the possession of the
applicant/accused has been sent for its forensic examination, but its’ record
could not be decoded. I.O further submits that applicant/accused is no more
required for investigation.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties and perused the relevant record.
6. We are inclined to grant bail to the
applicant/accused for the reasons that
except donation book no incriminating material has been collected against the
applicant/accused by the I.O. Mobile
phone recovered from the possession of the applicant/accused was sent to the
forensic expert, but it was reported that record could not be decoded. The I.O
could not establish the nexus of the act of the applicant with any banned
organization. Even otherwise, the evidentiary value
of the donation book without safe custody is to be determined at trial. So far as admission of the applicant before I.O during
investigation is concerned, such admission is inadmissible in evidence under
Article 39 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. According to investigation
officer, who is present in Court, the applicant/accused is no more required for
investigation and is behind the bars for last more than 06 months. It is well settled
law that 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 Muhammad Arshad vs. The State and another
(2022 SCMR 1555).
7. Prima facie,
there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant has committed
the alleged offences but there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into his
guilt. Resultantly, concession of bail is extended to applicant Raheem-ul-Haque
son of Ali Zar, subject to his furnishing solvent surety in
the sum of Rs.200,000/- (Rupees Two 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 on merits.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Wasim
ps