Section 497 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 364/302/109/34 kidnapping or abduction for murder, conviction, joint intent to bail, no direct evidence was provided and the trial was already alleged to have affected. Has already done. The co-accused were alleged to have abducted and killed the accused, who was also accused of identifying the place where the body was thrown, and the recovery of arms against him. It was alleged that the punishment for the accused was that the delay was 24. Hours of filing an FIR. Direct evidence of murder was not available on file. That the deceased's father had filed an application for justice for the case, which he denied in the present FIR. That there was doubt about that purpose. This co-accused has already been granted bail, and since the trial began, there was no room for denial of bail if a case was presented to approve the bail, so the perpetrator could be charged with murder. Direct evidence was not available and most of the evidence was collected. It was that he allegedly identified the place from where the body was thrown. There was no definitive evidence that the accused had recovered arms from which the victim's father had shown the complainant to be addicted and abused. When the issue of bail came out, there was no room for denial of bail itself, as presumed under section 497 (4), the accused's permission to request CC bail was granted and he was on bail. Was released
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
