ABDUL HAKEEM Versus State
ORDER
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.-- -Through captioned bail applications, applicants/accused Abdul Hakeem, Irshad Ali, Parvez Ahmed, Raees Ahmed and seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No.22/2019 registered at Police Station, Baiji Sharif for offence punishable under Sections 302, 506/2, 147, 148, 149, P.P.C.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 23.04.2019 at 2100 hours complainant Mst. Ghulam Zuhra lodged FIR at Police Station, Baiji Sharif stating that deceased Ubedullah son of Nek Mohammad Kalhoro was her son. It if further alleged that earlier due to false cases of Police, the son of complainant joined a job of Security Guard at Karachi as guard. On 24.02.2017 complainant came to know through owner of Security Company namely Feroze that her son has been arrested by Baiji Police on which she along with her son Shahiado and maternal-uncle Shamsudin met with SHO Abdul Hakeem Langah. The SHO arrested his other son Shahzado and inquired about the registered cases and abused him. It is alleged that at 1230 p.m., accused SHO Abdul Hakeem Langah accompanied with Sip Mithal Khakhrani, SIP Irshad Khoso, PC Parvez Ahmed Chachar and Raees Ahmed took out both arrested persons led away them to National Highway Pano Akil near Sadiq Shah and made straight fire upon Ubedullah in presence of Shahzado and caused his murder in fake Police encounter and lodged FIR No.19/2017 under sections 324, 353, P.P.C. Then complainant made applications to high ups of Police. Thereafter, complainant filed application under section 22-A before learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Sukkur which was subsequently allowed and complainant lodged FIR against accused persons.
3. During pendency of bail application the accused SHO/SIP Abdul Hakeem Langah has died and bail application to his extent was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 24.06.2019.
4. Learned Counsel for applicants contends that the applicants have falsely been involved in this case by the complainant. They contend that story, narrated in the FIR is unbelievable. They contend that main accused SIP Abdul Hakeem Langah has died while role of other accused is mere presence at place of incident. They further submit that according to FIR complainant was informed by one Feroze Channa the owner of security company where the deceased was working as guard but during investigation said Feroze Channa was denied and he also filed application before concerned Magistrate that he has not informed the complainant about the arrest of deceased Ubedullah. They further submit that main eye-witness Shamsuddin has filed statement before this Court that he was not available at place of incident but complainant party pressuring him to give evidence in their favour and on the day of incident he was faraway about 30 K.Ms, from place of incident. They further submit that all the PWs are related inter se, therefore, they prayed for confirmation of bail.
5. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General appearing for the State conceded for confirmation of bail mainly on the ground that main eye-witness Shamsud-din has filed statement/affidavit wherein he stated that he has no knowledge about the incident while Counsel for complainant vehemently opposed for confirmation of bail on the ground that applicants have pointed their weapons upon brother of deceased and have hence accused persons have committed heinous offence and caused murder of innocent person. He further contended that applicants are not entitled for confirmation of bail.
6. Heard arguments of learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Admittedly, the main .eye-witness Shamsuddin has filed statement before this Court that he was not available at the place of incident. Furthermore, prior to this incident FIR No.19/2017 against the deceased under sections 324, 353, 401, 427, 399, P.P.C. at Police Station, Baiji Sharif regarding encounter. Furthermore, a JIT was constituted and case was disposed of under 'B' Class but learned Magistrate did not agree with the report of JIT and took cognizance against the accused regarding alleged commission of offence. PW Shahzado stated that role of firing upon deceased Ubeduallah is attributed to co-accused SHO Abdul Hakeem Langah, whereas the allegation against remaining accused is of mere presence at place of wardat hence, it is yet to be determined by the trial Court that as to whether applicants/accused acted in furtherance of their common object with the support of main accused however, during pendency of bail application main co-accused S.H.O. Abdul Hakeem Langah was died. The applicants are regularly attending this Court as well as learned trial Court and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of bail against them therefore, at this stage it would not be proper to recall the interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to them when there is no allegation of misusing the concession of bail against them. Accordingly, aforesaid bail applications to the extent of applicants Irshad Ali, Parvez Ahmed, Raees Ahmed and Mohammad Mithal are allowed, interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants vide order dated 29.05.2019 and 30.05.2019 respectively are confirmed on same terms and conditions.
7. Needless to say, the observations made here-in-above are tentative in nature and only for the purpose of this bail application. Nothing herein shall affect the determination of the facts at the trial or influence the Trial Court in reaching its decision on merits of the case.
Bail Applications Nos.S-307/2019 and S-310/2019 stand disposed of in the above terms.
ADN/A-150/Sindh Bail confirmed.