ABDUL QADIR alias ALI Versus State
ORDER
KHADIM HUSSAIN M. SHAIKH, J .---By this Single Order, I intend to dispose of both the captioned bail applications, whereby applicants Abdul Qadir alias Ali son of Ghulam Shabir Khaskheli and Nasrullah son of Abdul Majeed alias Lutufullah Chandio seek their release on post arrest bail in Sessions Case No.134 of 2020, emanating from Crime No.197 of 2019, registered at Police Station Mehar for offence under sections 377, 34, P.P.C. read with sections 21, 22, 24 of Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 after their pleas for post arrest bail have been declined by dismissing their applications vide two separate orders dated 26.11.2019 passed by the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu.
2. The learned advocate for the applicants, placing on record the certified copies of the depositions of complainant Ayub Khoso and victim Waqar Khoso, Medical Officer Santosh Kumar and Medical Officer, Wazir Ahmed Thebo through his statement dated 13.04.2020, has mainly contended that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated by the complainant in this case due to the previous hostility between the parties; that the incident is shown to have taken place six months prior to the lodgment of the FIR without proper explanation thereof; that complainant Ayub Khoso in his deposition did not support the prosecution case, therefore, he was declared hostile; and, that the victim of the offence namely Waqar Khoso has also not implicated the present applicants in the commission of the alleged offence. Learned counsel prays that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.
3. The advocate for the complainant has raised no objection to the grant of bail to the applicants, contending that Complainant Ayub Khoso and victim Waqar Khoso have not supported the prosecution case. The learned Additional Prosecutor General has also frankly conceded to the grant of bail to the applicants, contending that no date and time of the incident is disclosed by the complainant and it is only stated that the incident had taken place about six months prior to lodgment of the FIR which was lodged on 27.09.2019; that there is no medical evidence to corroborate the prosecution case; that complainant Ayub Khoso, having not supported the prosecution case, has been declared hostile before the learned Trial Court and victim Waqar Khoso has also not identified the present applicants to be the same accused in his deposition recorded before the learned Trial Court; and, that there is no explanation for such an inordinate delay of more than six months in lodgment of the FIR. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the case requires further enquiry into the guilt of the applicants and their case falls in the ambit of sub-section (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., which entitles the applicants to the grant of concession of bail. Accordingly, the captioned bail applications are allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees One hundred Thousands only) each and the P.R. Bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
4. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature only for the purpose of deciding the instant bail application, which shall not, in any manner, influence the learned Trial Court at the time of final decision of the subject case.
SA/A-131/Sindh Bail granted.