ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

Cr. Bail Appln. No:  14 of 2010.

Date                          Order with signature of judge.

            1.         For orders on office objection as flag A.

            2.         For Hearing.                                                

3.3.2010.

                        Mr.  irfan Ali Bhurgri, advocate for the applicant.

                        Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, advocate for the State.

========

                        Applicant Majeed alias Majo Panhwar  is facing  trial  in the Court of learned Sessions Judge,  Kamber Shahdadkot in Sessions Case No.547/2009 arising out of Crime No.143/2009 of P.S Waggan registered for an offences fallen U/S 17 (1), 17 (2), 427, 149 PPC. The applicant approached  the learned Sessions Judge, Kamber Shahdadkot  for bail after arrest  but without fruitful result, hence instant  bail application is filed on behalf of the applicant.

                        Precisely  the facts of the prosecution as narrated in the F.I.R  are that on 13.11.2009  the complainant alongwith  his nephew Mohammad Ali S/O Haji Ramzan  Chandio and  Manzoor Ali S/O Wahid Bux  Chandio maternal cousin of the complainant proceeded for Kamber City in the car  No.569/ACP.   After finishing the work they returned back for  Wagan   when Mohammad Ali  was driving the car and the complainant  was sitting on the front seat.  When they reached  at Kabootar Miner  at 7.00 p.m,  they saw and identified 4 persons namely Abdul Majeed alias Majo  S/O Shahnawaz  having repeater 2. Ghulam Mustafa S/O Liaquat  having gun, 3.Lal Bux alias Laloo  S/O Ghulam Qadir armed with K.K type rifle, 4.Serwar alias Kaak S/O Ghulam Hussain  having gun in his hands, all bycsate Panhwar R/O Village Yaro Dero Taluka Warrah  and one unidentified person was  also in their company, having rifle in his hands.   It is further stated in the F.I.R that the culprits aimed the weapons towards the complainant party and  as  the car was in speed  they could not apply break  for stopping  of the car.  In the meanwhile Abdul Majeed alias Majo Panhwar fired at  by his repeater from the car which hit on the left side   of the face of Mohammad Ali  after breaking the  glasses of the car.   It is further stated that other accused also made firing at the complainant party.  Thereafter culprits  after crossing  Kabootar Miner  went towards western side.  The  complainant took injured Mohammad Ali Chandio and went to the Police Station after obtaining the letter for treatment, admitted the injured  at Larkana Hospital (Casuality) and on the next day he went to nekmard  Ghulam Qadir Chandio  and narrated the facts of the incident then on 14.12.2009 he lodged  his F.I.R as stated above.

                        Learned counsel for the applicant contended that there is enmity between the parties and they have filed cases against each other which are pending in the Courts.  It is further  contended  by the learned counsel for the applicant that C.P. No. 1129/2009 was filed by Rustam Ali  Panhwar and Allah Dino Panhwar relatives  of the  applicant against the complainant  party.  It is further  contended by the elarned counsel that after arrest of the applicant by the police nothing was recovered from the possession of the applicant.  It is further contended by the learned counsel that   from the place of wardat no empty  was recovered during the investigation.  Learned counsel   further contended that it is imaginary that  when the parties know each other and they have filed cases against each other  then as to how they can dare to commit an offence of robbery as alleged in the F.I.R.    He further contended that  as regards the injury is concerned,  according to medical  certificate the alleged inury is shajah e khafifah which is punishable for two years as tazir.  Learned counsel relied upon the case of  Meenhal and another v. the State (2007 M.L.D 214).  In these circumstances, he prayed for bail  for the applicant.

                        On the other hand, learned counsel for the State contended that  this is a  heinous offence  of robbery and offence against  society  and in this area  such  type of offences are repeated every day.   He further contended that this is a fresh case even charge has not been framed.

                        I have considered  the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.  It is admitted fact that during investigation nothing was recovered from the possession of present applicant.  It is admitted  fact that no empty was recovered from the alleged place of incident by the police  during investigation.  It is very imaginary  that when the parties know each other and litigations are going on how they could dare to commit such an offence of robbery on the highway.  It might be possible that the applicant party had attacked upon the complainant  to take revenge.   The  injury received by the injured Mohammad Ali  fall U/S 337-A i PPC which is punishable for two years.

             In these circumstances,  case of applicant  requires further inquiry as contemplated  by section 497(2) Cr.P.C, hence  I grant bail to the applicant in the sum of Rs.100,000/= with P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

JUDGE