MUHAMMAD YASEEN Versus State
ORDER
MUHAMMAD IQBAL MAHAR, J.--- Through instant application, applicant Muhammad Yasin who has been indicted in Crime No.28/2016 registered at Police Station C-Section Sukkur for offence under sections 302, 452, 392 read with 411, P.P.C., seeks bail after rejection of his bail application by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Sukkur vide order dated 26.09.2016.
2. The facts in nut shell are the complainant was living in Karachi while his sister deceased Mst. Farooqi Begum and her daughter Mst. Bint-e-Alia use to live together in Sukkur. Mst. Alia was teacher in Government Modern School. On 18.12.2016 at 3.00 pm Mst. Alia informed the complainant that as usual she returned back from School at 2.45 p.m. and found her mother Mst. Farooqi Begum lying dead on the bed, having strangulation marks on the neck. She also found house hold articles scattered and gold ornaments and cash Rs. 80000/ missing. On such information the complainant reached at Sukkur, saw dead body of his sister and went at Police Station and lodged the FIR against unknown accused persons.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant-accused contends that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been involved in this case; that the applicant/accused is in jail, hence he is no more required for further investigation by the police; that the name of applicant-accused does not appear in the FIR; that the evidence against the applicant/accused is that he was arrested on spy information and gold ornaments were recovered from his possession. He lastly concluded that mere recovery of gold ornaments would not connect the applicant with the commission of murder, therefore according to him case against the applicant requires further inquiry and he is entitled to grant of bail.
4. Conversely, learned Additional P.-G. assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application and submitted that no doubt the name of applicant/accused does not appear in FIR but gold ornaments were recovered from his possession at the time of his arrest and during interrogation he led the police party to his house and produced more ornaments. He further submitted the offence for which the applicant has been charged falls within prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C., as such he is not entitled to grant of bail.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant/accused, learned Additional P.-G. assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. No doubt the name of applicant-accused does not transpire in the FIR but he was arrested on spy information and from his possession two robbed gold bangles and two rings were recovered. He confessed his guilt before the police that after killing Mst. Farooqi Begum he took away the ornaments. During interrogation he led the police party to his house and produced more gold ornaments of deceased. Apart from above as per report of Assistant Inspector General of Police, Forensic Division Sindh Karachi, the latent impressions preserved on the lifter matched with the left thumb impression of the applicant, which prima facie connect him with the commission of main offence. The offence for which the applicant has been charged carries penalty of death/life imprisonment, which falls within the restrictive clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Furthermore, no mala fide has been alleged against the complainant and police. The progress report called from trial Court reveals that the charge has been framed and evidence of complainant has been recorded, therefore no case for grant of bail is made out.
6. In view of above discussion, I am of the considered view that the applicant/accused has failed to make out a case for grant of bail, therefore, his bail application is hereby dismissed. However, learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial of the case within a period of four months after receipt of this order.
MQ/M-175/Sindh Bail refused.