IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Cr. Bail
Application No.151 of 2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of bail application
--------------------------------------------
17.04.2025
M/s Muhammad Asghar Malik, Muhammad Wajahat
Ali Siddiqui & Harchand
Rai, advocate for applicants
Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
Complainant in person
-------------------------------------------
Applicants/accused
Dr. Syed Muhammad Zafar Hashmi
and Mst. Sajia Zafar seek pre-arrest bail in FIR No.115/2024, registered
at P.S. Sahil, Karachi, under Sections 380, 406, 34,
PPC, after rejection of their bail plea by learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII,
Karachi South vide order dated 15th June, 2024.
2. Brief
facts of the case are that complainant was residing on rent for the last four
years. On 23.10.2023, landlord Zafar Hashmi and his wife Sajia along
with co-accused Sarfraz,
who is estate agent, came to the rented premises, misbehaved with complainant,
disconnected the electricity of premises and ousted the complainant along with
her kids from the rented premises, as such, she went to her mother’s house.
After a week, Sajia called the complainant to collect
her luggage/articles but they again misbehaved and not allowed to take her
articles, valuing about four Crore rupees, including
20 tolas gold, valuable watches, furniture etc.,
hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned
counsel for applicants mainly contended that the complainant was tenant of
applicants and she has admitted in FIR that she did not pay electricity bills;
that there is 7 months delay in lodging of FIR without any plausible
explanation; that during investigation IO found them innocent and placed their
names in column-2 of challan; that instant case was
investigated twice, the second challan is under
scrutiny, however, the learned Magistrate still has not taken cognizance.
Learned counsel for applicants has placed on record conversation between the
applicant and complainant through WhatsApp, which
shows that there was no grievance against the applicants party; that cheques issued by the complainant in respect of tenancy
liabilities were dishonoured and applicants party
registered two FIRs against complainant party; that case of applicants requires
further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC.
4. Learned
Additional Prosecutor General Sindh, assisted by complainant, has opposed the
bail application on the ground that applicants are nominated in FIR and they
had committed the alleged offence. Complainant present in person submits that
applicant party sold out her valuable household articles to one Noureen and other persons and that Noureen
as well as PW Aslam supported the version of
complainant, who are independent witnesses, therefore,
applicants are not entitled for grant of bail.
5. Heard
learned counsel for applicants, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh and complainant
and perused the material available on record.
6. Admittedly,
there is delay of 7 months in lodging of FIR, as the alleged incident had taken
place on 23.10.2023 whereas FIR was registered on 15.05.2024. Surprisingly,
complainant disclosed the facts that about two months when she was ousted from
the rented premises, her gold ornaments, cash, 9MM pistol, furniture and other
household article were sold out by applicants. During investigation of FIR, IO
found them innocent and placed their names in Column-2 of challan
and submitted such report before learned concerned Magistrate under Section
173, Cr.PC. Learned Magistrate concerned directed the
police to reinvestigate the matter by an IO not below the rank of Inspector
vide order dated 15.06.2024. Second IO again found the applicants innocent and
placed their names in Column-2 of challan and still
second challan is under scrutiny. Applicant party
also registered two FIRs against the complainant party bearing Crime
No.263/2024 at P.S. Gizri and Crime No.131/2025 at PS
Boat Basin both under Section 489-F, PPC. Sufficient material is available on
record which makes out the case of applicants for further inquiry in terms of
Section 497(2), Cr.PC. It is well settled exposition of law that at
bail stage deeper appreciation of evidence couldn't be made but the Court has
to get the picture through tentative assessment of prosecution story and merits
of the case cannot be considered at bail stage. Reliance is placed on the case
of Muhammad Sarfraz Ansari versus The State and
others (PLD 2021 Supreme Court 738). Prima
facie, from the tentative assessment of material available on record, case for
grant of bail to applicants has been made out, therefore, interim pre-arrest
bail granted to applicants/accused by this Court vide order dated 20.01.2025 in
the aforesaid FIR is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
7. The
instant bail application is accordingly disposed of.
J U D G E
Gulsher/PS