IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE thatta

Cr. Bail Application No. of 2019

1. Roshan Ali s/o Missri,

2. Iqbal s/o Vikio,
3. Ramzan s/o Jumoon,
All b/c Roopai now confined at
Sub Jail Sujawal ………………………………… Applicants/Accused

VERSUS

The State ………………………………………………………..……… Respondent

BAIL APPLICATION U/S 497 CR.P.C

It is prayed on behalf of the Applicants/accused named

above that this Honourable Court may be pleased to admit them on
bail in crime No.217 of 2019 of PS Mirpur Bathoro, for the offence
punishable u/s 324, 337 A(i), 337 F(i), 147, 148, 149, 114, 504 PPC,
on consideration of the following facts and grounds:-

FACTS

The brief facts of prosecution case as alleged in the FIR

are that on 30.09.2019 at 0200 hours, complainant Mohammad
Moosa Ghoto appeared at PS Bathoro and lodged his report alleging
therein that he reside at above given address. There is village of
Missri Roopai party at the railway track leading to the village of
complainant who restrained complainant party to pass from there.
Many times, the complainant party made complaints to nekmards
that it is their old track/path, which caused dispute between
complainant and accused party. On 27.09.2019, the complainant
and his relatives Mir Mohammad s/o Mohammad Soomar (2)
Mhammad Hussain s/o Sulleman (3) Abdul Karim s/o Adam Ghoto
boarded on two motorcycles, left the village and were coming to
Mehmooda Wah and reached near the village of Missri Roopai where
they noticed Ghulam Mustafa and Sultan Roopai standing there, who
abused the complainant party but they left the place and came to
Mehmooda Wah Stop where they deal with the business of coriander
etc. when they were sitting there, meanwhile at 1510 hours,
everyone Ghulam Mustafa s/o Missri having hatchet (2) Sultan s/o
Missri having lathi (3) Roshan Ali s/o Missri having wooden
plank/Patti (4) Mohbat s/o Missri having wooden plank/patti (5)
Iqbal s/ Vikio having hatchet (6) Gullu s/o Jumoon having lathi (7)
Ali Nawaz s/o Gullu having wooden plank/Patti (8) Meenh Wasayo
s/o Peeru having hatchet (9) Ramzan s/o Jumoon having wooden
stripe (10) Missri s/o Jumoon, all b/c Roopai, (11) Mohammad
Siddique s/o Haji Durrani came there, started abusing the
complainant party. Missri instigated accused persons to gab the
complainant party and not to spare them on whose instigation
accused Ghulam Mustafa caused blunt side hatchet blows to
Mohammad Juman Gotho on head with intention to kill him, Iqbal
caused blunt side hatchet blows to Mir Mohammad Ghoto with
intention to kill him on his head, Ramzan Roopai caused wooden
stripe blows to Abdul Karim Ghoto at head and elbow, Sultan caused
wooden stipe blows to complainant at left temporal region area and
left hand little finger. All the accused persons caused lathi, stripe
and blunt side hatchet blows to complainant party on different parts
of body who raised cries which attracted Abdul Ghafoor and Mangio
Ghoto and others sitting at Stop who intervened and rescued them.
Then accused persons went away towards their village while
abusing. Complainant and Abdul Ghafoor arranged vehicle, came to
PS Bathoro, obtained letter for treatment and went to Taluka
Hospital Bathoro, where the doctor referred them to Hyderabad for
further treatment. After treatment, the complainant appeared at PS
and lodged the FIR in above terms.
 That, police registered the FIR, conducted usual
investigation and arrested the applicants/accused who are confined
at Sub Jail Sujawal, hence this bail application.

GROUNDS

1. That, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that

the Applicants/accused have committed the offence with which they
stand charged.
2. That, there is inordinate delay of about (03) days in
lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation while the PS is
situated at a distance of 3/4 kilometers from the alleged place of
incident which shows due deliberation and consultation on the part
of complainant and false implication of applicants/accused in such
type of case can not be ruled out.
3. That, in fact no such incident took place and entire
prosecution story is baseless and managed one. The Applicants are
innocent and have been implicated in this false case due to dispute
over track/passing which has been admitted by the complainant in
the FIR. No such incident took place at all and the instant FIR has
been lodged with malafide intention just to pressurize and harass
the applicant party.
4. That, the story narrated in the FIR, is false, managed
and unbelievable in the eyes of law. It is unbelievable that the
within the view of complainant and PWs, so many alleged injuries
could be caused to injured and the complainant could easily
remember them same and just seeing the same and not to
intervene. It is also not believable that he remembered what each of
the accused had as a crime weapon, despite of alleged presence of
so many people at the alleged place of incident which is shown as
stop where the presence of so many people is shown.
5. That, section 324 PPC is misapplied as the FIR nowhere
shows that the alleged injuries were caused with intention to kill the
injured as if they really had intended to kill the complainant party,
they would have caused sharp side blows of hatchet but the
backside of hatchet blow is alleged and also there is no repetition of
alleged injuries to make out intent of murder, however the
remaining sections are bailable.
6. That, no such incident took place at all as alleged in the
FIR and the complainant lodged this false case with malafide
intention and for ulterior motives.
7. That, in the above circumstances, the case against the
applicants/accused is one of further enquiry u/s 497 (2) Cr.P.C and
the prosecution story is full of doubts and it is settled law that
benefit of doubt must be extended to accused even at bails stage.
8. That, the alleged offence does not exclusively fall within
the purview of section 497 (1) Cr.P.C.
9. That, the accused persons had remained in custody of
police, despite that, nothing was recovered from them, as such, the
virtual investigation has been completed and the applicants/accused
are not more required to police for investigation purpose.
10. That, further detention of applicants/accused would not
serve any useful purpose but hardship for their family as they are
bread winning members of their family.
11. That, the basic concept of bail is that no innocent
person’s liberty is to be curtailed, until and unless proved otherwise.
The presumption in law is that every accused is innocent until his
guilt is proved.
12. That, the Applicants are local persons and there is no
any apprehension of their abscontion.
13. That, the Applicants are ready to furnish solvent surety
to the satisfaction of this Honourable Court.
14. That, further grounds will be argued at the time of final
arguments with permission of this Honourable court.

Thatta
Dated: 03.10.2019 Advocate for Accused