STATE Versus BAHADUR

ORDER

1. Bail order passed by Mr. Aijaz Hussain, Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur on 10-1-1993, thereby granting bail to accused Bahadur and Muhammad Yousuf in Crime No.10/92 of Police Station New Foujdari Shikarpur under sections 302/34, P.P.C., 324/ 337(A) of P.P.C. as amended and 13-D, Arms Ordinance is forwarded to this Court by Sessions Judge, Shikarpur for taking suo motu action. After scrutiny of the matter, the learned Chief Justice ordered on 9-2-1993 for judicial action. On 7-3-1993, the matter was admitted and notice was issued to respondent to show cause why bail granted to them be not cancelled. The respondents have appeared through Mr. Fareed Ahmed Dayo.

2. I have heard the learned AA.-G. and the counsel for respondents. The former has suggested that under suo motu powers of this Court, bail granted to respondents be cancelled, while the later has supported the bail order.

3. I have perused the record. Bail application of co-accused Bakhshal (Criminal Bail Application N05W of 1992) was rejected by me with the following observations:--

4. "The death of Nazir Ahmed is certified to be the result of injuries which caused internal haemorrhage and shock. These all injuries are attributed to applicant and co-accused Bahadur and Yousuf."

5. The case was pending before IIIrd Additional District Judge, Shikarpur, Mr. Zamir Hussain Larik, who was at Islamabad for Shariah training and the 1st Additional Sessions Judge Mr. Abdul Rashid Nizamani was Incharge of the Court of IIIrd Additional District Judge, Shikarpur. Mr. Muhammad Aijaz Hussain was Incharge of the Court of IIIrd Additional District Judge, Shikarpur on 10-1-1993, when he granted bail to respondents Bahadur and Muhammad Yousuf. On 10-1-1993, Mr. Abdul Rashid Nizamani was on casual leave.

6. The bail is granted to the respondents on consideration of the ground that ocular testimony was in conflict with medical evidence, making it a case of further enquiry. The learned Incharge Judge ignored the bail order passed by this Court on the bail application of co-accused Bakhshal, whose bail was refused with observations that fatal injuries to accused Nazir Ahmad were attributed to Bakhshal and the respondents herein. The learned Judge ignored the allegations in F.I.R. against respondents, wherein they are not only named but are attributed specific role of causing Lathi blows to complainant Sohno and deceased Nazir Ahmed. The learned Judge, who was Incharge of the Court of IIIrd Additional District Judge, Shikarpur, who was on casual leave, acted with utmost haste in hearing the bail application and granting bail to respondents. Such an order cannot be sustained. Mr. Farid Ahmed Dayo, learned Advocate for the respondents is unable to show if on merits respondents were entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail granted to respondents Bahadur and Muhammad Yousuf both sons of Mir Muhammad in hereby cancelled. Copy of this order be sent to learned IIIrd Additional District Judge, Shikarpur for further action in accordance with law. Criminal S.M. Revision No.17 of 1993 stands disposed of.

7. N.H.Q./S-1032/K Bail cancelled.