1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO, C.J.---By this order I intend to dispose of the above Criminal Bail Application arising out of Crime No.97 of 2007 registered at Police Station Shara-e-Faisal, Shah Faisal Town, Karachi for offence under sections 337-A(i)/337-A(iv), P.P.C.
2. ' The facts germane to the prosecution case that complainant Riasat Ali lodged F.I.R. With Police Station Shahra-i-Faisal, Shah Faisal Colony on 3-11-2006 regarding the alleged incident taken place on 21-11-2006 in respect of alleged injuries case against the applicants.
3. ' On the basis of F.I.R. The police 'tried to arrest the applicants, and due to apprehension of arrest, the applicants moved pre-arrest bail application before the learned Sessions Judge, Karachi East and they were granted interim pre-arrest bail but subsequently the same was recalled vide, dated 11-12-2006, therefore, the appellants moved this Court with the plea of pre-arrest bail.
4. ' It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated by the police at the instance of complainant who has inimical terms with the applicants on account of matrimonial affairs. It has further been contended the offence with the applicants are charged is not punishable with death, imprisonment for life or even for 10 years, therefore, does not come within the purview of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. It has also been contended by the learned counsel that there is no fracture sustained by the complainant. Learned counsel argued that the applicants are respectable persons of the locality, as applicant No.2 is Doctor by profession, whereas the applicant No.1 is student of MS (M.Phil), therefore their arrest will cause their humiliation and disgrace.
6. ' Learned counsel appearing for the State has conceded the grant of pre-arrest bail. Whereas learned counsel appearing for the complainant opposed the bail application, stating that the applicants have caused injuries to the complainant.
7. ' I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the advocates for the respective parties and have gone through the record made available before me.
8. Perusal of record shows that this is injuries case and no serious injuries have been sustained by the complainant. Furthermore the offence which the applicants are charged do not come within the ambit of A prohibitory clause. Resultantly, interim pre-arrest earlier to the applicants on 15-12-2006 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
9. ' Cr. Bail Application No.1258 of 2006 stands disposed of.