2023 PLP 69 (YLRN)

AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.

The applicant Imtiaz Ali son of Late Ghulam Jafar booked in FIR No. 366 of 2021 under sections 320/322/114, P.P.C. registered with Police Station Gadap City, Karachi was admitted to pre-arrest bail vide order 13.10.2021 and today it is fixed for confirmation or otherwise.

2. The allegation against the applicant is that on 18.07.2021 at about 2110 hours the brothers of complainant namely Syed Rizwan Haider and Syed Faizan Haider who were on motorcycle and reached in front of Koyla Karahi main superhighway, Mazda No. VV-4540 rapidly hit to them and Syed Faizan Haidar had died on the spot while Syed Rizwan Haidar sustained injuries. Hence the FIR was lodged.

3. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with the malafidely by the police; that the applicant has not committed the crime deliberately or intentionally but the applicant intended to save the people applied the break but unfortunately the incident had taken place. He argued that actually rickshaw hit motorcycle and deceased got injuries. He further argued that applicant had joined the investigation and even appeared before the trial court. He argued that Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet with mala fide intention by adding section 322, P.P.C. that applicant has possessed forged and fake driving license. Lastly he contended that section 322 is not applicable, whereas the remaining sections are bailable. Lastly learned counsel for the applicant while reiterating the grounds mentioned in the memo. of bail application submitted that after obtaining the pre-arrest bail, the applicant is regularly attending the trial court as well as this court and not misused the concession of pre-arrest bail, hence he prays that pre arrest bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed.

5. Conversely, learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the confirmation of pre arrest bail to the applicant on the ground that applicant has the route permit only for Karachi Region, whereas the vehicle was travelling from Karachi to Jacobabad and as per investigation the applicant had no valid license as he has only learning license which had already expired on 31.05.2019. Learned counsel for the complainant argued that by rash and negligent driving, applicant hit the motorcycle due to which brother of complainant expired; such offence does not come in the prohibitory clause and there is sufficient evidence available which connect the applicant with the crime. Learned Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh while adopting the arguments of learned counsel for the complainant, added that due to negligence of applicant one man has lost his life and that after the incident the applicant ran away from the spot hence he opposed the confirmation of bail.

6. It appears that due to rash and negligent driving of applicant brother of complainant namely Syed Faizan Haidar had died and other brother Syed Rizwan Haidar sustained injuries; during investigation, the driving license of the applicant was found learning license for motorcycle and car which has also expired in the year 2019; The eye-witnesses has also supported the prosecution version in his statement. It may not be out of place to mention here that offences of accidents are increasing day by day particularly at the hands of the drivers who ply transport vehicles without a licence or a valid or effective licence. Comparison of the facts of the instant case with that of referred above, aptly indicates that the same retain much gravity as the applicant was allegedly driving the Mazda Truck without any licence and caused sudden death of a man besides injuring the other. Such an act, which is in rampant increase now-a-days, cannot be taken lightly and is required to be dealt with iron hands.

7. It may not be out of place to mention here that for deciding the bail application the court has to observe the tentative assessment and deeper appreciation of evidence is not required and it will not be fair to go into discussion about the merits of the case at this juncture. In this respect reliance is being placed on the cases of Saleh Muhammad v. The State (PLD 1986 Supreme Court 211) and The State v. The Zubair and 4 others (PLD 1986 Supreme Court 163). Thus taking a tentative assessment of the available record, I am of the considered view that there is sufficient material available on record connecting the applicant with the alleged crime and being prima facie linked with the commission of the offence is held disentitled to the concession of bail. Resultantly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 13.10.2021 is recalled. The applicant is present in court he is taken into custody and remanded to Central Jail, Karachi.

8. Before parting, it needs not to make clarification that the observations recorded above, being necessary for deciding the instant bail application, are tentative in nature, therefore, the trial court shall not be influenced in any manner whatsoever. SA/I-23/Sindh Bail declined.