IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application
No.1151 of 2017
|
DATE |
ORDER
WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE. |
For
hearing of bail application.
06.10.2017
Mr. Jawaid
Ahmed Chattari advocate for applicant/accused.
Mr. Siraj
Ahmed advocate for complainant.
Mr. Mohammad
Iqbal Awan DPG.
------------------------
1. Applicant/accused
Arshad Ali Bukhari seeks bail in Crime No.36/2017 registered against him and
others at Police Station Sir Syed Karachi for offences under Section 384/34 PPC
read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 & under Section 25-D of
Telegraph Act. After usual investigation, challan was submitted against accused
under the above referred sections.
2. Bail
application was moved on behalf of the applicant/accused before learned Judge,
Anti-Terrorism Court No. IV, Karachi. The same was rejected vide order dated
15.06.2017.
3. Learned
Advocate for the applicant/accused mainly contended that no call was made by
the applicant/accused to the complainant on his Cell No. 0300-9273584. Learned
counsel for the applicant/accused further contended that only piece of evidence
collected against applicant/accused was that he had made calls from his Cell
No. 0312-2296342 to the mobile of
the co-accused. Lastly, it is contended that involvement of the
applicant/accused in this case requires evidence.
4. Mr.
Mohammad Iqbal Awan DPG submits that only piece of evidence collected against
applicant/accused was that he had made several calls from his Cell No. 0312-2296342
to co-accused Sahibzada Imran. DPG submits that applicant/accused is connected
to this case.
5. Mr.
Siraj Ahmed learned counsel for complainant submits that there is sufficient
material against applicant/accused to connect him in this case. He further
submits that applicant/accused was watching the activities of the complainant
at the instance of co-accused.
6. We
have carefully heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the
relevant record. Admittedly no call was made by the applicant/accused from his
Cell No. 0312-2296342 to the complainant, but the piece of evidence collected
against applicant/accused is that he had made calls from his mobile to
co-accused Tahir Mehmood. Learned DPG after going through CDR pointed out that
there is no mention of Cell number recovered from the possession of the
applicant/accused in the CDR. Under these circumstances, involvement of the
applicant/accused in this case, prima-facie, requires evidence and case against
applicant/accused requires further inquiry. Therefore, concession of bail is
extended to the applicant/accused Arshad Ali Bukhari, subject to furnishing
solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) and P.R bond in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
7. Needless
to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature
and the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the same while deciding the case
on merits.
JUDGE
JUDGE
Musharraf Ali P.A.