THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail No.S-556 of 2022

Applicants:          Saeed, Asif, Hamzo and Muhammad Qasim through Mr. Abdul Khaliq Bughio, Advocate.

Complainant:      Habibullah, present in person.

Respondent:        The State

Through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing:  02.12.2022

Date of Order:     02.12.2022

O R D E R

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- Through instant Criminal Bail Application, applicants Saeed son of Abdul Rasool Seelro, Asif son of Ghulam Rasool, Hamzo son of Mahboob Chandio and Muhammad Qasim son of Abdul Nabi seek post-arrest bail in Crime No. 83/2022, offence under Sections 302, 452, 506/2, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-H(ii), 147, 148, 149, 504 & 114 P.P.C of of the Police Station K.N.Shah. Prior to this, they filed such application, but the same was turned down by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I/MCTC, Dadu, vide Order dated 08.10.2022; hence they filed instant Criminal Bail Application.

2.                The details and particulars of the F.I.R. are already available in the bail application  and F.I.R., same could not gathered from the copy of F.I.R. attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

3.                Per learned counsel, the applicants/accused are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motives; that the role assigned against accused Saeed is general in nature, whereas injuries attributed to accused Hamzo and Muhammad Qasim do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C, if any role is assigned it is against accused Asif, which is also general in nature, no specific role has been assigned against him; the complainant and injured present in Court submit that due to intervention of Naikmards they have compromised with the accused party outside the Court, as such they have no objection if the bail is granted to the applicants/accused.  They further added that after grant of bail the compromise application will be filed before the learned Trial Court as presently the applicants/accused are only the male members of their families. He lastly prayed for grant of bail to the applicants/accused.

4.                On the other hand learned D.P.G has vehemently opposed for grant of bail, however, he has conceded that the witnesses present in the Court have no objection for grant of bail to the applicants/accused.

5. Heard and perused. Admittedly, the offence with which the applicants/accused are charged is compoundable and the complainant and injured persons present in the Court raised no objection for grant of bail to the accused persons otherwise role assigned against accused Saeed is general in nature; whereas accused Hamzo inflicted lathi blow to Zaheer and Muhammad Qasim also given butt blows of his pistol; as such the offence with which the applicants are charged does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. whereas the role assigned against accused Asif will be determined after evidence by the Trial Court as mob of people attacked upon the complainant party.  Learned counsel for the applicants/accused has made out the case of grant of bail in view of sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. coupled with no objection raised by the complainant, injured persons so also husband of the deceased for grant of bail to the applicants/accused.  In view of the above the bail application is allowed, the applicants/accused are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.5,0000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousands only) each and P.R.Bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

6.                Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of either party at trial.

                                J U D G E

Manzoor