BHAGIYO KHAN Versus State

ORDER

1. ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J .---Applicants Bhagio Khan, Saifal, Mohammad Ismail, Imtiaz Ali, Mohammad Ashfraf, Javed Ali and Mohammad Rafique all by caste Bangulani, seek their pre-arrest bail in Crime No.217/2020, registered at Police Station New Foujdari, for offence under sections 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 337-H(2), 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C. Earlier the applicants were granted interim pre-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Shikarpur vide order dated 7.11.2020, however later on the same was recalled vide order dated 12.12.2020.

2. As per FIR, the allegation against the applicant Bhagio Khan is that he caused hatchet blows to Muhammad Munawar, against Saifal is of instigation, against Muhammad Ismail and Imtiaz is of aerial firing, against Javed Ali is of causing lathi blow to the complainant and against Muhammad Rafique is of causing lathi blow to Mst. Waziran.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that FIR was registered with false facts; that the offence does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and the same is punishable up to 07 years; that there is conflict in between medical and ocular evidence; that initially case was disposed of under 'B' class however, learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence; he further contended that mere registration of other FIRs is no ground for refusal of bail; that the enmity is admitted in the FIR; learned counsel prayed for confirmation of bail. In support of his contention, he relied on case of Rahim alias Rahmak and another v. The State (1998 PCr.LJ 821) and Jamal-ud-Din alias Zubair Khan v. The State (2021 SCMR 573).

4. Learned DPG duly assisted by Mr. Mehfooz Ahmed Awan, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that applicants are nominated in the FIR with specific role; that medical evidence is in support of ocular evidence; that abductee in Crime No.160/2020, Mst. Bakhtawar is still not recovered; all the applicants/ accused shared their common intention. They lastly submitted that no malafide or ulterior motive so also false implication has been pointed out by the applicants. He further submitted that applicants are influential persons and due to their influence this heinous crime is disposed of by police in 'B' class; however learned Magistrate took cognizance; they prayed that bail application of applicants may be dismissed. They relied on Muhammad Jahangir Khan and others v. The State and others (2020 SCMR 1270).

5. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on the record.

6. This court vide order dated 18.1.2021 called report from S.S.P Kashmore alias Kandhkot S.S.P, Shikarpur, as regards to the criminal record of the applicants and as per compliance report of SSP, Shikarpur the applicants are involved in the following case:-

2. Criminal record of applicant/accused Bhagiyo Banglani

3. S.No.

4. Crime No.

5. Under section

6. Police Station

7. Status

8. 1.

9. 110/2020

10. 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 114, 147, 148, 149, 504, P.P.C.

11. New Foujdari

12. Challaned

13. 2

14. 145/2020

15. 452, 147, 148, 506/2, P.P.C.

16. New Foujdari

17. Challaned

18. 3

19. 160/2020

20. 452, 324, 148, 149, P.P.C.

21. New Foujdari

22. Challaned

23. 4

24. 217/2020

25. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148 and 337-H(2) P.P.C.

26. New Foujdari

27. Challaned

28. Criminal record of applicant/accused Saifal Banglani

29. S.No.

30. Crime No.

31. Under section

32. Police Station

33. Status

34. 1.

35. 110/2020

36. 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 114, 147, 148, 149, 504, P.P.C.

37. New Foujdari

38. Challaned

39. 2

40. 145/2020

41. 452, 147, 148, 506/2, P.P.C.

42. New Foujdari

43. Challaned

44. 3

45. 217/2020

46. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148 and 337-H(2), P.P.C.

47. New Foujdari

48. Challaned

49. Criminal record of applicant/accused Javed Banglani

50. S.No.

51. Crime No.

52. Under Section

53. Police Station

54. Status

55. 1.

56. 110/2020

57. 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 114, 147, 148, 149, 504, P.P.C.

58. New Foujdari

59. Challaned

60. 2

61. 217/2020

62. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148 and 337-H(2), P.P.C.

63. New Foujdari

64. Challaned

65. Criminal record of applicant/accused Imtiaz Banglani

66. S.No.

67. Crime No.

68. Under Section

69. Police Station

70. Status

71. 1.

72. 110/2020

73. 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 114, 147, 148, 149, 504, P.P.C.

74. New Foujdari

75. Challaned

76. 2

77. 217/2020

78. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148 and 506/2, P.P.C.

79. New Foujdari

80. Challaned

81. Criminal record of accused Muhammad Rafiq Banglani

82. S.No.

83. Crime No.

84. Under Section

85. Police Station

86. Status

87. 1

88. 145/2020

89. 452, 147, 148, 506/2, P.P.C.

90. New Foujdari

91. Challaned

92. 2

93. 217/2020

94. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148, 337-H(2), P.P.C.

95. New Foujdari

96. Challaned

97. Criminal record of accused Muhammad Ismail Banglani

98. S.No.

99. Crime No.

100. Under Section

101. Police Station

102. Status

103. 1

104. 217/2020

105. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148, 337-H(2), P.P.C.

106. New Foujdari

107. Challaned

108. Criminal record of accused Muhammad Ashraf Banglani

109. S.No.

110. Crime No.

111. Under Section

112. Police Station

113. Status

114. 1

115. 217/2020

116. 452, 324, 427, 114, 504, 506/2, 147, 148, 337-H(2), P.P.C.

117. New Foujdari

118. Challaned

7. The report submitted by Mr. Amjad Ahmed Shaikh, S.S.P Kashmore alias Kandhkot reveals that Bakhtawar Mughul obtained khulaa from the family court Shikarpur and applicant party initially threatened Mst. Bakhtarwar for her kidnapping/murder therefore she lodged an FIR Crime No.145/2020 at Police station Fojdari later on applicant party kidnapped the girl from the house of her brother and such FIR was registered bearing FIR No.160/2020 at Police Station Foujdari by Ahsan Ali, her brother. SSP, Kashmore alias Kandhkot in his inquiry report stated that on rejection of bail application by Sessions Judge, Shikarpur. The applicants burnt house of the complainant of FIR No.160/2020 and the family of complainant party is now living in different District and are saving their lives from the hands of applicant. He further submitted that the applicants' party in collusion with investigation officer of the case namely ASI Zafar Chang attempted to manage FIR into 'B' class however, the learned court has taken the cognizance.

8. Record reflects that injured namely Munawar Ali, Sikandar Ali, Ghulam Sarwar and Mst. Waziran appeared before the doctor on the same date and they were also examined by the I.O wherein they have fully supported the case of prosecution. Applicants Bhagio, Muhammad Ashraf, Jawed Ali and Muhammad Rafique are nominated in prompt FIR with specific role of causing injuries to the injured which allegation is also supported by medical evidence. Learned counsel for the applicants not pointed out any mala fide on the part of complainant and the applicants are seeking pre arrest bail for which strong grounds are needed. It is well settled proposition of law that at bail stage only tentative assessment is to be made, whereas deeper appreciation is not permissible. Under these circumstances, applicants Bhagio, Muhammad Ashraf, Javed Ali and Muhammad Rafique have been failed to make out a case for confirmation of their bail. Resultantly, interim pre-arrest bail already granted to them vide order dated 18.12.2020 is hereby recalled and their pre arrest bail application is dismissed.

9. The case of applicants Saifal, Muhammad Ismail and Imtiaz is on different footings as in the FIR the allegation against applicant Saifal is of instigation, against Muhammad Ismail and Imtiaz is of making aerial firing. The mashirnama of place of incident shows that no empties are recovered. They also not caused any injury to the PWs. Accordingly, they have made out a case for pre-arrest bail, as such interim pre-arrest bail already granted on 18.12.2020, is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

119. JK/B-7/Sindh Order accordingly.