IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Appln. No. S-749 of 2024

Applicant	Ali Gul s/o Arbab Ali Jafferi,
	Through Mr. Mumtaz Ali Brohi, advocate
The State	Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G for the State
Date of hearing	05-03-2025
Date of order	05-03-2025

O R D E R

OMAR SIAL, J.- Ali Gul seeks pre-arrest bail in crime number 269 of 2024 registered under sections 392 and 34 P.P.C. at the Saddar police station in Jacobabad.

2.      The F.I.R. was registered on 16.11.2024 on the complaint of Mirza Khan Panhwar. Panhwar recorded that on 07.11.2024 when the applicant and two unidentified persons came to his shop and by showing him a pistol took away Rs. 300,000.

3.      I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Deputy Prosecutor General.

4.      The nine-day delay in lodging the F.I.R. has been attributed to Ali Gul's promise of returning the money he had allegedly stolen, but not fulfilling his promise. I find it odd and unnatural that a man already known to the complainant would walk into his shop and take Rs. 300,000 with him. This occurrence prima facie has its roots in a trade transaction between the two individuals. Upon a tentative assessment, I cannot eliminate malafide at this preliminary stage. It appears that the learned trial court was swayed in dismissing the bail because the applicant at that stage had not cooperated with the investigation. No such complaint has been made before this court. It is also noteworthy that a co-accused, Qurban Ali, whom the prosecution claimed was one of the unidentified men, was granted bail on 30.01.2025. According to the prosecution, the role of all three accused was the same, i.e., on the show of weapons, they had taken away Rs. 300,000. If Qurban Ali, who is said to be one of the three men, is admitted to bail, then the applicant deserves the same concession. The offence with which the applicant is charged carries a potential sentence of three to ten years, thus falls within the non-prohibitory clause of section 497. Looking at the case holistically, I do not see any exceptional or extraordinary grounds to deny the applicant bail.

5.      Given the above, the interim pre-arrest bail given to the applicant is confirmed on the same terms and conditions. As a further condition of bail, the applicant is directed to co-operate fully with the investigating officer failing which the concession of bail will be withdrawn.

JUDGE

Abdul Salam/P.A