Sumair Ali vs State S — 2025 YLR 1814 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Sumair Ali VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 337-H(2), 504, 147, 148 & 149---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rash or negligent act to endanger human life or personal safety of others, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Allegations against the appellant was that he along with his co-accused made firing upon the complainant party, and as a result brother of the complainant sustained firearm injuries---Record transpired that though the applicant had been charged by the complainant in the FIR for inflicting injury on the person of his brother through his repeater, however, as per Medico Legal Report, the nature of injury on his person was declared as ghayr-jaifah mutalahimah and the punishment provided for such kind of hurt under S.337-F(iii), P.P.C was imprisonment of either description for term which may extend to 03 years, therefore, the subject offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Grant of bail in such like offences is a rule and refusal thereof is an exception---Upon a plain reading of the FIR, it became abundantly clear that enmity existed between the parties concerning a land dispute, with ongoing litigation---Circumstances of the present case, on the face of it, indicated the possibility that the accused might have been falsely implicated---Moreover, there was delay of eight hours in lodging the FIR and the injury attributed to the applicant did not fall within ambit of prohibitory clause---Applicant had only made single fire upon injured which hit him on his leg being non-vital part of his body making the offence as mentioned in the FIR---Applicant, however, did not repeat the fire despite having ample opportunity to do so, which showed that perhaps the applicant harboured no intention to kill the victim, hence, the applicability of S.324, P.P.C coupled with prosecution's evidence, in particular, the medical evidence of the injured as well as complainant and the recoveries, if any, allegedly made during the course of investigation, shall be determined by the Trial Court after recording of evidence pro and contra---Further, the challan in the subject matter had already been submitted in the Court and the trial was ripe for its commencement, therefore, the guilt or otherwise of the applicant shall better be adjudged by the Trial Court during the course of trial---Even otherwise, bail does not mean the acquittal of accused but only change of custody from government agencies to the surety, who on furnishing bail bonds, takes responsibility to produce the accused whenever required to be produced---Bail application was allowed, in circumstances.

Sumair Ali vs State S — 2025 YLR 1814 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR