IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.3149 of 2025
[
Abdul Latif son of Ghulam Mustafa Dars versus The
State ]
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of bail application
-----------------------------------------------------
29.01.2026
Mr. Ahmed Hussain Jokhio, advocate for
applicant
Mr.
Sharafuddin Kanhar, APG
-------------------------------------------
SHAMSUDDIN
ABBASI, J.- Applicant Abdul Latif son of Ghulam Mustafa Dars seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No.351/2025, registered
at P.S. Sujawal for offence under sections 4, 5 and 8
of 2019 read with Section 337-J, PPC, after rejection of his bail plea by
learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Sujawal vide
order dated 07.11.2025.
2. Brief
facts of the prosecution case are that on 25.09.2025, during snap checking
police party stopped one Mazda (PX-0040), loaded with Gutka material, driver of said
Mazda escaped away, however, 3 persons, namely, Yaseen,
Usman and Shafi Mohammad
were arrested, who disclosed that recovered material belongs to Abdul Latif Dars and driver was Pervaiz Punjabi, hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned
counsel for applicant mainly contended three co-accused
have been admitted to bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Sujawal and the case of present applicant is on identical
footing, therefore, he requests for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail.
4. Learned
A.P.G. does not oppose for confirmation of bail on the ground that alleged
offence does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC.
5. Heard
learned counsel for applicant as well as learned A.P.G. and perused the
material available on record.
6. The
alleged offence does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section
497, Cr.PC and rule in such cases is bail and its
refusal is an exception, as held by apex Court in the case of Muhammad Tanveer versus State (PLD 2017 SC 733). Moreover, learned
trial Court has already granted bail to co-accused Yasin,
Usman and Shafi Muhammad
and the case of present applicant/accused is on identical footings. Keeping in
view the rule of consistency, interim pre-arrest granted to applicant/accused
by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 is hereby confirmed on the same terms
and conditions.
7. Needless
to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature,
the same would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case of the
applicant/accused on merits.
8.
Instant criminal bail application
is disposed of in the above terms.
J U D G E
Gusher/PS