Crl. Bail Application No. 762 of 2011.



                                      Mr. Justice Irfan Saadat Khan.

                                      Mr. Justice Muhammad Tasnim.






Date of hearing:             11th July, 2011



Applicants:                    Shaukat Ali and Dawood through Mr.Amjad Ali, Advocate.



Respondent:                  The State through Mr. Saleem Akhtar, Additional P.G.




MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J:- Applicants are booked in F.I.R No.68/2011, under Section 324, 353, 436, 440, 341, 337-A(i), 147, 148, 149 P.P.C. & 6/7 A.T.A., P.S Shahdadpur. In the first place applicants filed criminal bail application before Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, Shaheed Benazirabad, who after hearing their bail application dismissed the same per order dated 20.04.2011. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order, both applicants have filed the present bail application.


2.                The case of the prosecution, as setout in the F.I.R., is summarized as under:


3.                The complainant SIP Nadeem Akhter Baig of P.S Shahdadpur lodged the F.I.R No.61/2011, under Section 324/353, 224, 225, 147, 148, 149, 337 A-F(i) P.P.C. and in such case accused persons namely Khudadad Brohi, Amir Bux Brohi and Nazeer Ahmed Brohi were implicated for keeping illegal arms and interference in government work. After registration of F.I.R., SI Hamid Ali Chandio and other police officials arrested the above accused persons. It is alleged that as many as 80 persons duly armed with different weapons viz. guns, pistols, lathies and stones in front of police station protested for release of arrested accused persons. It is alleged that the mob made firing and stoning at the government vehicles and snatched away government SMG rifle with three magazines and 19 bullets from SIP Ghulam Mustafa and injured H.C Muhammad Nawaz of P.S Shahdadpur and also snatched SMG with three magazines and 90 rounds. It is further alleged that mob also injured P.C Pir Allan. In the circumstances, F.I.R was lodged for interfering in the official duties and also damaging the government vehicles and for making firing on the police.


4.                Mr. Amjad Ali, learned counsel for applicants, in support of bail application, has submitted that allegations in the F.I.R are general in nature and no specific direct role has been assigned to the present applicants. It is also not mentioned in the F.I.R that present applicants were armed with which weapon. He further submitted that present applicants were arrested on 21.02.2011, but no recovery was affected. He has further submitted that P.Ws. have not supported the version in F.I.R and none of the P.Ws. have assigned any role to the present applicants. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no medical evidence available on the record to show any injury to any of the police officials at the hands of the present applicants. Learned counsel for applicants lastly submitted that there is doubt in the prosecution case, benefit whereof be extended to the      present applicant by enlarging them on bail. In               support of his submission learned counsel for applicants has relied upon the case of Muhammad Shahid v. The State (2006 P Cr. L J 1600).


5.                Conversely Mr. Saleem Akhtar, Additional P.G. has vehemently opposed the grant of bail and has submitted that firing was made by the mob at the police station and injury was caused to the police officials. He also submitted that government vehicles were damaged by the mob. However, he admitted that no medical evidence is available on record. He admitted that all the prosecution witnesses are police officials and nothing was recovered from the present applicants.


6.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record and the case law cited at the bar.


7.                From the perusal of the F.I.R., it is manifestly clear that no direct role has been assigned to the present applicants, allegations are general in nature and no evidence is available showing any recovery from the present applicants or any injury caused by the present applicants to any police officials. We are of the view that this case requires further enquiry in terms of subsection (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, by short order dated 11.07.2011 present applicants namely Shaukat Ali son of Dur Khan and Dawood son of Dur Khan were admitted to bail on their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) each with P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. These are the reasons for the same.


8.                In view of above order, office objection and exemption application are disposed of.








Karachi, July                 , 2011.