IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Cr. Bail
Application No.423 of 2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of bail application
---------------------------------------------
30.04.2025
Rao Shahzad Khan, advocate for
applicant
Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional
Prosecutor General Sindh.
------------------------------
Shamsuddin Abbasi,
J.-- Applicant Sheeraz seeks
post arrest bail in FIR No.793/2024, under sections 392, 397, 427, 34, PPC,
registered at P.S. Boat Basin, Karachi, after rejection of his bail plea by
Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Karachi South vide order dated 14.02.2025.
2. Brief
facts of the cases are that on 22.11.2024 at about 2003 hours, 3 dacoits, who
appeared to be Pathans by their huliya, duly armed with weapons, came at the
main gate of Bungalow No.F-7, Old Clifton, Hatim Alvi Block-4, Clifton, Karachi
and snatched mobile phones and cash from complainant and his colleagues, broken
CCTV camera and escaped away. Hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned
counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this case for mala intentions and ulterior motives; that
applicant is not nominated in FIR; that applicant/accused was arrested in FIR
No.795/2024 wherein mobile phone snatched in this case was allegedly recovered
from his possession; there is no criminal record of applicant, mere recovery of
mobile phone requires further inquiry in terms of section 497(2), Cr.PC.
4. On the
other hand, learned Addl: P. G. Sindh has opposed for grant of bail on the
ground that robbed mobile phone has been recovered from his possession.
5. Heard
learned counsel for applicant as well as Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
and perused the material available on record.
6. Admittedly,
applicant is not nominated in FIR, only allegation available on record against him
is that robbed mobile phone in this case has been recovered from his possession
when he was arrested in FIR bearing No.795/2024 of P.S. Boat Basin in which,
per learned counsel for applicant, he has been admitted to bail. There is no
identification parade to connect him in the alleged offence. Sufficient
material is available on record, which makes out a case of further inquiry into the guilt of applicant in terms
of Section 497(2), Cr.PC. In such like cases, rule is grant of bail and its
refusal is an exception. Reliance is placed on the case of Muhammad Tanveer
versus State (PLD 2017 SC 733). Therefore, post arrest bail is granted to applicant/accused,
subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction
of trial Court.
7. Needless
to mention here that observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and
would not prejudice the case of either party at trial.
8. Instant
criminal bail applications are disposed of in the above terms.
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS