AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.---The applicants in the above three bail applications were admitted to interim pre-arrest bail vide order's dated 15.01.2021, 30.07.2021 and 11.08.2021 in Crime No.647/2020 registered at Police Station Gizri, Karachi under sections 302/34, P.P.C., today their matters are fixed for confirmation of said pre-arrest bails or otherwise.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant Rizwan Haider in Criminal Bail Application No.76/2021 submitted that the applicant is regularly attending the trial court as well as this court and not misused the concession of pre-arrest bail. He further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He also contended that the applicant has nothing to do with the instant offence as the incident took place at main road during chase of deceased by the area police mobile where applicant was not present and he was implicated in the instant matter only because he was Incharge of the area Police Station. It is further contended that the deceased was died due to road accident while his motorcycle collided with a mazda therefore, no case under section 302, P.P.C. is made out. He further contended that the deceased was criminal/dacoit involved in several crimes including snatching of mobile phones etc. hence he has malafidely involved the applicant in the instant case who is a Police Officer. He further contended that the medical certificate of the deceased clearly shows that the deceased was died due to fatal injury on his head caused by some hard and blunt substance and not by maltreatment or firing.
Learned Counsel for the applicant also submitted that whole tenure of service of the applicant is spotless and he enjoyed a good reputation in Police Department and that there is no reason for him to kill the deceased. He next contended that all these aspects of the matter make the whole prosecution story doubtful, which requires further enquiry. He, therefore, prayed 'that the pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant Muhammad Lateef in Criminal Bail Application No.1430/2021 submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case.
He further contended that the applicant is regularly attending the trial court as well as this court and not misused the concession of pre-arrest bail. He further contended that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and the allegations made against the applicant are general in nature. He also contended that entire FIR is based on presumption and assumption. He submitted that the applicant was the I.O. of the case and has nothing to do with the death of the deceased though the death of deceased was due to collision of his motorcycle with a mazda and that the custody of the deceased was never handed over to the applicant. He further contended that the medical certificate of the deceased issued by the MLO supports the version of applicant. He also contended that there is no any direct or indirect evidence against the applicant. He next contended that all these aspects of the matter make the whole prosecution story doubtful which requires further enquiry. He, therefore, prayed that the pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant Muhammad Raees Abbasi in Criminal Bail Application No.1537/2021 submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further contended that the. applicant is regularly attending the trial court as well as this court and not misused the concession of pre- arrest bail. He also contended that no specific role has been attributed to the applicant. He also contended that the deceased was died due to traffic accident and such version of the applicant is also supported by the medical certificate. He further contended that the applicant is neither desperate, dangerous nor hardened criminal nor previously involved in any criminal activity nor previous convict rather he is a police official of a good reputation in the department. He further contended that the deceased was habitual criminal involved in several crimes including snatching of mobile phones within the limits of different police stations. He next contended I that all these aspects of the matter make the whole prosecution story doubtful which requires further enquiry.
He, therefore, prayed that the pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed.
5. Learned APG Sindh submitted that all the applicants have taken same stance that the death of deceased was due to traffic accident and there is no lapse on their part but they failed to produce any FIR lodged in respect of any such accident or sent the vehicles for FSL so far. He also contended that no mala fide has been shown on the part of the complainant to establish their false involvement. He next contended that the applicants being police officials influenced the investigation and tried to hide the murder of deceased under garb of traffic accident. He contended that the applicants do not deserve any leniency therefore, the interim pre-arrest bails granted to the applicants accused may be recalled.
6. Learned Counsel for the complainant submitted that the applicants are involved in the case and they malafidely misused their powers and made all efforts to shatter the fact of murder of deceased under the garb of road accident. He further contended that though the death of deceased is claimed to be result of collision of his motorcycle with a mazda during police chase, however, they do not justify as to what prevented them to lodge an FIR under section 320 of Q&D Ordinance. He further contended that the applicants though by their own could call the CDR of cell phone of the deceased in order to bring on record as to who made a call to the deceased in odd hours of night when he left and where he was when the incident took place but they malafidely skipped such fact so that the murder of deceased could not be established. He also submitted that the statement of PW Nazir who is alleged driver of mazda shows that the deceased was shifted to Jinnah Hospital on ambulance whereas the stance of the applicants is that they themselves shifted the deceased to Jinnah Hospital in their police van after accident. He therefore, prays that the applicants are not entitled for concession of bail and as such, opposed the confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicants.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for applicants and learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh duly assisted by the learned Counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
8. Perusal of the record reveals that the deceased was died due to road accident and in this regard statement of a PW/private person namely Nazir who is allegedly driver of mazda with whom the motorcycle of the deceased was claimed to have collided was recorded. The medical certificate shows that the deceased had received hard and blunt injury on his head. Neither the deceased was in custody of the applicants nor any other marks of violence were found on the body of deceased to prima facie establish that the deceased was murdered by the applicants. No enmity of the deceased or complainant has been shown with the applicants. As far as not lodging of FIR of road accident and the skipping to call CDR report of cell belonging to the deceased is concerned, that needs deeper appreciation of evidence which could not be considered at bail stage.
9. It is not out of context to mention here that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. At bail stage, deeper appreciation of evidence and circumstances appearing in the case are not permitted and only tentative assessm ent is to be made, however, where accused satisfies the Court that there are reasonable grounds to believe that they are not guilty of such offence, then the Court must release them on bail. Wisdom is sought from the case titled Yar Muhammad v. The State and another reported in 2004 YLR 2230.
10. No complaint of misuse of concession of bail or tampering the record has been pointed out despite the fact that the applicants are police officials. The applicants are regularly appearing in the case before this court as well as trial court. No specific role has been 'assigned to any of the applicants.
11. It may not be out of place to mention here that the object of bail is neither punitive nor preventive and therefore, deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it may be required to ensure the presence of accused during trial. The punishment begins after conviction and not before it, as in criminal justice system every man is deemed to be innocent until duly found guilty. It needs not to re-emphasize` that the purpose of putting the un-convicted persons in custody is nothing but to secure their attendance at the trial.
12. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, case of the applicant's prima facie calls for further inquiry in terms of subsection (2) of `section 497, Cr.P.C. Consequently, the interim pre- arrest bail granted to applicants vide orders dated 15.01.2021, 30.07.2021 and 11.08.2021 are confirmed on same terms and conditions.
All the listed Criminal Bail Applications stand disposed of. Office is directed to place copy of this order in all connected bail applications.