ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No.68 of 2025

DATE

ORDER WITH SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs

 

For hearing of bail application

------------------------------------------

13.03.2025

           

            Mr. Tariq Majeed, advocate for applicant

            Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

            SIP Deedar Hussain of PS Madina Colony, Keamari

            ------------------------------------

 

Shamsuddin Abbasi, J.Applicant/accused Jeetan son of Ramji seeks          pre-arrest bail in FIR No.384/2024, registered at P.S. Madina Colony, Keamari, Karachi for offence under sections 337-A(ii), 337-L(ii), 337-F(ii), 342, 506-B, PPC, after rejection of their bail plea by the trial Court vide order dated 09.12.2024.

 

2.         Briefly, the facts of instant case are that complainant lodged FIR in which it is stated that on 10.11.2024 at 11:30 pm he was beaten by Kamal, his wife and other unknown persons at Scholar Pizza, to whom he will identify when appear before him, hence the subject FIR.

 

3.         Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant/accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity; that there is delay of five days in lodging of FIR, without any plausible explanation; that all the sections applied in the FIR are bailable, except section 337-A(ii), which does not fall with the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC; that case of applicant requires further inquiry in term of Section 497(2), Cr.PC. Notice was issued to the complainant but he is called absent.

 

4.         On the other hand, learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh opposed for grant of bail on the ground that applicant/accused is nominated in FIR with specific role of causing injury to complainant by sharp cutting weapon, which has been declared under section 337-A(ii), PPC, however, she admits that offence does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC.

           

5.         Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh and perused the material available on record.

 

6.         Admittedly, there is delay of 5 days in lodging of FIR, without plausible explanation and in the background of enmity, it cannot be ruled out that FIR has been lodged by complainant after due deliberation and consultation. However, all the sections applied in the aforesaid FIR are bailable, except section 337-A(ii), PPC, which does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC. In such like cases, rule is bail and its refusal is an exception. Moreover, no purpose would be served out if pre-arrest bail is refused to the applicant and thereafter he will be admitted to post arrest bail. Reliance is placed on the case of MUHAMMAD TANVEER versus STATE (PLD 2017 Supreme Court 733)

 

7.         In the view of above, applicant/accused has made out a case for grant of pre-arrest bail, therefore, interim pre-arrest bail granted to him by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2025 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

 

8.         Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, the same would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits.

 

9.         Instant criminal bail application is disposed of in the above terms.

 

J U D G E

 

Gulsher/PS