IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Criminal Bail Appln. No. S-133 of 2025
|
Applicants |
: |
Gul Bahar s/o Ghanwar Khan Chandio and Zubair Ali s/o Maqsood Ali Chandio, , |
|
|
|
Through Mr. Muhammad Ali Pirzada, advocate |
|
|
|
|
|
Complainant |
: |
Liaquat Ali |
|
|
|
Through Mr. Abdul Rehman A. Bhutto, advocate |
|
|
|
|
|
The State |
: |
Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, D.P.G for the State |
|
|
|
|
|
Date of hearing |
|
30-04-2025 |
|
Date of order |
|
30-04-2025 |
O R D E R
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J.- Through instant criminal bail application, applicants/accused Gulbahar and Zubair Ali seek post-arrest bail in Crime No.05/2025, registered at Police Station Mahi Makol for the offence U/S 324, 114, 337-A(i), F(i), 147, 148, 337-H(ii) P.P.C. Prior to this, they filed such application but the same was turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kambar, vide order dated 03.03.2025, hence they have filed instant criminal bail application.
2. The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants/accused are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in this case; that though the name of applicants/accused transpired in the F.I.R but no specific role, if any, has been assigned to the applicants only role of general nature has been assigned and they have not caused any injury to prosecution witnesses. He lastly submits that case has been challaned and accused are no more required in this case. He prays for grant of post-arrest bail to the applicant/accused.
4. On the other hand learned D.P.G. and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed for grant of bail on the ground that they are nominated in the F.I.R, therefore, they are not entitled for concession of bail.
5. Heard and perused.
6. From perusal of record, it appears that though the name of applicants/accused has appeared in the F.I.R but no specific role has been assigned to the applicants/accused, only mere presence has been shown at the place of incident.
7. It is further argued that the applicants/accused are presently in judicial custody, and their continued detention would serve no useful purpose, as the challan has already been submitted and they are no longer required for the purposes of investigation. In this regard, reliance is also placed upon an unreported judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Jahzeb Khan v. The State through A.G. KPK and others, Criminal Petition No.594/2020, wherein the Honourable Supreme Court was pleased to hold that:
"4..... Petitioner's continuous detention is not likely to improve upon investigative process, already concluded, thus, he cannot be held behind the bars as a strategy for punishment. A case for petitioner's release on bail stands made out."
8. At bail stage, only a tentative assessment is to be seen. However, the role assigned to present applicants/accused for sharing common intention will be decided at the time of recording evidence
9. Learned counsel for the applicants/accused has made out a case for grant of post-arrest bail in view of sub-section (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C, resultantly the instant bail application is allowed and the applicants/accused Gulbahar and Zubair Ali are admitted to post-arrest bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.
10. 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