SHOUKAT ALI alias BHUTTO Versus State
ORDER
KHADIM HUSSAIN M. SHAIKH, J.--- Through the captioned bail application, the applicant Shoukat Ali alias Bhutto son of Mehar Din Jamali seeks his release on post arrest bail in the case emanating from Crime No.88 of 2019, registered at Police Station, Khadhar, District Shaheed Benazirabad for offence under section 395, P.P.C., after his bail plea has been declined by the learned IIIrd. Additional Sessions Judge, Shaheed Benazirabad dismissing his bail application vide order dated 31.10.2019.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant has mainly contended that the applicant is innocent and he along with his two sons namely Halar and Waqar have been falsely implicated by the complainant in the subject case due to their previous hostility over transaction relating to the motorcycle in question; that both the co-accused namely Halar and Waqar were admitted to ad-interim pre-arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Shaheed Benazirabad vide order dated 13.11.2019, which has been confirmed vide order dated 30.11.2019, certified copy whereof has been filed by the learned Advocate for the applicant along with his statement dated 09.12.2019; that the case of the present applicant is identical to that of co-accused Halar and Waqar, who happen to be his real sons ; that the applicant in custody since 05.10.2019 and thereby he has remained in custody for 02 (two) months and 25 days; that investigation stood completed and the applicant/accused is no more required for the purpose of investigation ; that during investigation, the applicant and co-accused were found innocent and the subject case was recommended for its disposal under class 'C', but the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Sakrand disagreeing with report under section 173, Cr.P.C. took the cognizance vide order dated 28.10.2019; and, that case requires further inquiry into the guilty of the applicant in this case. Learned counsel prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned A.P.G has opposed the grant of bail to the applicant contending that the applicant is nominated in the FIR and PWs Muhammad Iqbal and Zahid Hussain have supported the version of the complainant in their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C.
4. I have considered the submissions of learned advocate for the applicant and learned A.P.G and have gone through the material and police file with the assistance of learned A.P.G.
5. From a perusal of the record, it would be seen that the applicant Shoukat Ali alias Bhutto and his two sons namely Halar and Waqar have been implicated in this case by the complainant with their names, parentage and caste; both the co-accused Halar and Waqar have already been admitted to pre-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Shaheed Benazirabad; after investigation the case was recommended for its disposal under class 'C' and releasing the applicant under the provision of section 169, Cr.P.C. as is reflected from the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. initially submitted by I.O.; the case of the present applicant is at par with the case of co-accused Halar and Waqar, who are sons of the applicant and are already on bail; the accused and the complainant are stated to be residing in the same village Wasayo Jamali, Taluka Sakrand, District Shaheed Benazirabad; and, previous hostility between the parties over business transaction relating to the motorcycle, which was allegedly purchased by the applicant from the complainant on credit basis, is alleged. On a query, learned A.P.G has stated that the FIR was lodged on 05.10.2019 at 6030 hours; the applicant was arrested on 05.10.2019 at 1000 hours and the place of incident was inspected on 05.10.2019 at 1230 hours and whereas the statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. of both the PWs Muhammad Iqbal and Zahid Hussain, who are sons of the complainant, were recorded on 06.10.2019 i.e. after one day of arrest of the applicant and the entire aforesaid exercise was done, although the said PWs had allegedly accompanied the complainant to the police station at the time of lodging the subject FIR and there is no explanation for such delay in recording the statements of the PWs. Under the circumstances of the case, the case of the present applicant falls well within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C, which entitles him for grant of concession of bail. These are the reasons of short order announced by me on 31.12.2019, whereby the instant bail application was allowed and the applicant was directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
6. The observation made herein above are tentative in nature only for the purpose of deciding this bail application which shall not influence the learned trial Court while deciding the subject sessions case.
ADN/S-15/Sindh Bail granted.