1. IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, by committing trespass into house of complainant Abdul Wahab, committed theft of his gold ornaments, two goats and the clothes, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 1 Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Dadu, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498-A Cr.PC.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party and co-accused Ghulam Sarwar and Sarmad have already been acquitted by learned trial Magistrate; therefore, the applicant is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail, as he is apprehending his unjustified arrest at the hands of police.
4. Learned Additional Prosecutor General for the State has recorded no objection to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant.
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about two days and such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The identity of the applicant under the solar light bulb is appearing to be weak piece of evidence and acquittal of co-accused Ghulam Sarwar and Sarmad with utmost similar role could not be overlooked. In these circumstances, a case for grant of pre-arrest bail on point of malafide in favour of the applicant obviously is made out.
7. In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.
8. The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly .st