| Case ID |
16d1d8f4-7d0a-413e-b640-7cecfe66dcef |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Cr. Bail Application No. S-43 of 2015 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 26, 2015 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Sindh High Court dismissed the pre-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Ismail. The court determined that the applicant had unlawfully trespassed into the complainant's residence armed with a repeater and had fired upon the complainant, resulting in six firearm injuries. The court found that the necessary legal criteria for granting pre-arrest bail were not met, particularly due to the seriousness of the allegations, the presence of ample evidence connecting the accused to the offenses, and the fact that a co-accused was absconding. Consequently, the interim pre-arrest bail previously granted to the applicant was recalled, and the application for pre-arrest bail was denied. The decision was based on the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Penal Code, with references to relevant case law reinforcing the court's stance against granting bail under such circumstances. |
| Summary |
In the notable case of Cr. Bail Application No. S-43 of 2015 decided by the Sindh High Court on October 26, 2015, the applicant Ismail sought pre-arrest bail concerning charges under the Criminal Procedure Code and Penal Code, including sections 324, 452, 337-D, 114, 504, 147, 148, and 149. The allegations involved Ismail and his co-accused unlawfully trespassing into the complainant's residence, armed with deadly weapons, and firing upon the complainant, resulting in six firearm injuries. The prosecution provided substantial evidence linking the accused to the crimes, and one of the co-accused remained absconding. The defense argued delays in lodging the FIR and questioned the attribution of injuries to specific accused, citing potential malafides. However, the court found these arguments unconvincing, emphasizing the absence of malafides and the robustness of the prosecution's evidence. Referencing the precedent set in Riaz Ahmed v. The State (2009 SCMR 725), the Sindh High Court affirmed that pre-arrest bail was not warranted under the circumstances. The judge, Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto, highlighted that the serious nature of the offenses and the failing of the defense to demonstrate any procedural malpractices led to the dismissal of the bail application and the recall of the previously granted interim pre-arrest bail. This case underscores the judiciary's stringent stance on bail applications where substantial evidence and potential flight risk factors are present, reinforcing the importance of adhering to legal protocols in criminal proceedings. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
THE STATE,
ISMAIL
|
| Judges |
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO
|
| Lawyers |
Gulzar Ali Soomro,
Ishrat Ali Lohar,
Shahid Shaikh
|
| Petitioners |
ISMAIL
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2016 SLD 3933,
2016 YLR 2305
|
| Other Citations |
Riaz Ahmed v. The State 2009 SCMR 725
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
498,
497,
324,
452,
337-D,
114,
504,
147,
148,
149
|