Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Sajid Ali VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Amjad Ali SahitoSathi M. Ishaque and S.K. Lodhi
2025 Y L R 2658 [Sindh] Before Amjad Ali Sahito, J Sajid Ali---Applicant Versus The State---Respondent Criminal Bail Application No. 591 of 2025, decided on 10th April, 2025. (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 376, 335 & 342---Rape, itlaf-i-salahiyyat-i-udw, wrongful confinement---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Allegation against the accused-applicant was that he confined the victim wrongfully and committed zina with her---Admittedly, victim was previously wife of the present applicant and claim of the victim was that the applicant had divorced her and subsequently, she had remarried with one "A" and thereafter, the present applicant had committed zina with her---It was alleged by applicant that prior to this, applicant also lodged FIR against alleged victim and "A" for committing Nikah over Nikah and the applicant had not committed any offence---Although there was allegation against the applicant that after divorcing his wife, he had committed zina with his ex-wife/victim but no medical certificate was available on record to believe the same---All those aspects of the case shall be decided by the Trial Court when evidence would be recorded---At bail stage, only tentative assessment was to be made and deeper appreciation was not permissible---Applicant was in jail and he was no more required for investigation---Further detention of applicant would not improve the case of the prosecution---In such circumstances, applicant had made out a case for grant of bail in terms of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Bail application was allowed, in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Bail---Observations of Court---Scope---Observations made in the bail order are tentative in nature and should not influence the Trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits. Sathi M. Ishaque and S.K. Lodhi for Applicant. Qadir Hussain Khan for the Complainant. Ms. Rahat Ahsan, Addl. P.G. for the State. Date of hearing: 10th April, 2025. order Amjad Ali Sahito, J.---Through this Bail Application, applicant/accused seeks post-arrest bail in Crime No.83/2025 for the offence under Sections 376/335/342 P.P.C. registered at PS Awami Colony, after his bail plea has been declined by the learned VII-Addl. Sessions Judge, Karachi East vide order dated 15.02.2025. 2. The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder. 3. Per learned counsel for the applicant, applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case; that the applicant has not divorced his wife Mst. Kiran, as such, allegation for committing zina against him is baseless; that prior to this FIR, the applicant also, lodged an FIR against Mst. Kiran and one Arsalan for committing Nikah over Nikah; that the applicant has not committed any offence; that the applicant is in jail and he is no more required for further investigation. Lastly, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned Addl. P.G. vehemently opposed for grant of bail. 5. Heard and perused. 6. Admittedly, Mst. Kiran was previously wife of the present applicant and claim of the victim/Mst. Kiran is that the applicant has divorced her and subsequently, she has remarried with one Arsalan and thereafter, the present applicant has committed zina with her. Whereas, learned counsel for the applicant stated that prior to this, applicant also lodged an FIR against Mst. Kiran and Arsalan for committing Nikah over Nikah and the applicant has not committed any offence. Although there is allegation against the applicant that after divorce his wife, he has committed zina with his ex-wife/Mst. Kiran but no medical certificate is available on record to believe the same. All these aspects of the case shall be decided by the trial Court when evidence will be recorded. At bail stage, only tentative assessment is to be made and deeper appreciation is not permissible. The applicant is in jail and he is no more required for investigation. His further detention will not improve the case of the prosecution. Reliance is place in an unreported case of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Jahzeb Khan v. The State through A.G. KPK and others in Criminal Petition No.594/2020; wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that: "4..... Petitioner's continuous detention is not likely to improve upon investigative process, already concluded, thus, he cannot be held behind the bars as a strategy for punishment. A case for petitioner's release on bail stands made out." 7. In view of the above, learned counsel for the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail in terms of subsection (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. Resultantly, the instant bail application is allowed. The applicant/accused named above is granted post-arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/-and P.R. bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. 8. Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits. S-59/Sindh Bail granted.