2004 PLP 631 (MLD)

Anwar H. Ansari for the State. By this order I intend to dispose of criminal bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Mehrab Chandio in a case bearing Crime No. 117 of 2003, Police Station Dadu, for an offence under section 324, P.P.C. The bail plea of the applicant was declined by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, vide order dated 31-10-2003. The prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. is that on 2-7-2()03 at 12-10 noon complainant Nazeer Ahmed Chandio appeared at Police Station .Dadu and lodged a F.I.R. alleging inter alia that on the eventuful day he along with his cousins Chanesar and Ghulam Nabi had come to attend the Court of Sessions Judge Dadu. Before attending the Court the complainant had deposited the licenced gun with the Court's guard and after having date he went to see his counsel in the Bar Room when he was followed by applicant Mehrab. It ' is alleged that the applicant took out pistol from the fold of his trouser and pointed towards him in order to commit murder but immediately after that police mobile came there who apprehended the applicant/accused. Thereafter the complainant approached the concerned police station where F.I.R. was registered as stated above. The investigation followed and in due course the applicant was sent up to stand trial. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant though armed with a pistol has not used the same. It has further been contended that the pistol was surrendered in the Court before the guard and thereafter he has left for appearing in Court. On return this unhappy incident took place resulting in arrest of the applicant and thereafter the recovery of licenced pistol from him. According to the counsel though fire was made but the same was not' effective as none sustained any injury. It has also been propounded that the applicant has remained behind the bars for more than 7 months and there is no likelihood of the trial in a foreseeable future. On all these scores it has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that it is a fit case where the applicant could be enlarged on bail. As against the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant, learned State counsel has raised no objection in view of the above position. What has been discussed above I am of the considered view that learned counsel for the applicant has been able to make out a case fort bail which is granted provided he furnishes surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Criminal Bail Application No. 10 of 2004 stands disposed of. N.H.Q./M-8/K Bail allowed.