IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No.S-540 of 2025

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

1. For orders on O/objection at flag-A.

2. For hearing of post-arrest bail.

Date of hearing 27.10.2025.

Mr. Illahi Bux Jamali, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. Ubedullah Malano, Advocate for complainant.

Syed Sardar Ali Shah, Addl. Prosecutor General for State.

************

O R D E R

The applicants namely Abdul Ghafoor son of Muhammad Paryal, Abdul Ghaffar son of Abdul Ghafoor, Waheed son of Bakhshal and Bakhshal son of Muhammad Arbab in the above matter seek bail after arrest in Crime No.11 of 2025 police Station Korai for offence u/s 324, 337F(iii), 337F(ii) 337A(i), 337F(i), 147, 148, 149, 504 PPC wherein they are alleged to have caused injuries to the complainant party by way of aggression and at the said time are said to have used fire arms.

Learned counsel for the applicants contends that no specific role of the accused persons has been specified in respect to the alleged fire arm injuries. He further contends that the injury blows may requires punishment of three years which does take the case to the prohibitory element. He further contends that no injury on any vital part has been reported and all accused are family members. He further contends that cross-version of the present applicant FIR has been alleged wherein the injuries reported are sever too as reported in the present matter and despite the said the other side has already been granted bail in those matters. Learned counsel contends that the cross version requires consideration as to the place of incident in order to ascertain the element of aggression. He relies upon cases reported in 2020 SCMR 677 and 2020 SCMR 971.

Learned counsel for the complainant however, contends that vital and non-vital part is not relevant and further contends that where the attempt was made in a manner where Section 324 PPC has been attracted the applicants cannot seek bail. He relies upon case of Sheqab Muhammad v. The State and others (2020 SCMR 1486).

Learned Additional Prosecutor General however, contends that 09 injuries are reported wherein only one person namely Abdul Ghaffoor has been arrested from whom fire arm has been recovered. He further contends that lathi has been recovered from one other accused. He relies upon case reported in 2025 SCMR 629.

Having heard the learned counsels and gone through the record. Apparently, there is a cross-version of the matter the details thereof requires ascertainment. As to the element of aggression on account of place of incident, the nature of injuries in the present matter bring the same outside the prohibitory element and on account of the fore given the applicants having made out a case of further inquiry as to the allegations made. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. The applicants are admitted to post-arrest and be released on bail subject to furnishing their solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) each and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

Needless to mention here that observation as above are tentative in nature and not meant to affect merits of the case before the learned trial Court.

Bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.

J U D G E

Ihsan/PS.