Crl. Bail  Appln. No.  187 of 2013.


Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge



            Messrs Saeed Ahmed Bijarani, and Shamasuddin Abbasi, Advocates for the applicants.

            Mr. Abdul Rasheed Soomro, State Counsel.



Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J:       Through this application, the applicants seek post arrest bail in Crime No.14/2013, registered with P.S Tangwani, District Kashmore @ Kandhkot, for offences punishable under Sections 171-F, 353, 395, 342, 148 and 149 P.P.C, after their similar prayer was declined by learned Sessions Judge, Kashmore.


2.         The allegations against the accused/applicants are that on 11.5.2013, they alongwith many unknown persons came in Polling Station B.H.U Pir Jan Bajkani (Female), deh Unar, District Kashmore; snatched mobile phones, cash and ballot papers from the polling personnel and started casting fake votes. In the meantime SHO of the area alongwith his subordinates arrived at the place of occurrence and arrested some of the persons including applicants and recovered from their possession the ballot papers etc. 


3.         Learned counsel for the applicants contended that applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case at the instance of their rival party.  Learned counsel further submitted that the recovery of ballot papers is shown by the police from the possession of applicants; but actually the applicants were present in the polling station and ballot papers were issued to them for casting their respective votes and they have not robbed such ballot papers from the complainant.  Learned counsel further contended that the applicants are behind the bars since date of their arrest i.e. 11.5.2013. Learned counsel placed reliance on the case of Nasir Khokhan v. The State (2006 Y.L.R 3042), and case of Shehzore and another v. The State (2006 Y.L.R 3167).


4.         On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed grant of bail on the ground that all the accused are nominated in the F.I.R; they were arrested on the spot and there is recovery of ballot papers from their possession.


5.         I have considered submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record. Perusal of F.I.R does not show that ho many ballot papers were robbed by the accused/applicants and how much ballot papers were recovered from each of them. The record also does not show whether the ballot papers alleged to have been recovered from accused were the robbed ballot papers or these were the ballot papers, which according to applicants were issued to them for casting their votes. The applicants are in jail since date of their arrest effected on 11.5.2013.  The case stands challaned and the applicants are no more required for investigation purpose.


6.         In the case of Nasir Khokhan (supra), the accused was admitted to bail, while observing that accused who was in judicial custody, was not required for investigation purpose, even the charge had to be framed, though more than ten months had passed.


7.         In case of Shehzore and another (supra), it was observed that under provisions of Section 395, P.P.C alternate punishment i.e. imprisonment for life or imprisonment not less than four years and more than ten years having been provided, lesser sentence should be considered by the Court in the matter of bail and the accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. 


8.         Keeping in view the dicta laid down in the aforementioned case law, and in view of the above discussion, the applicants were granted bail by short order dated 05.06.2013, on their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousands) each and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, and these are the reasons for my above short order.