Find a Lawyer

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 13th March 1970, in Criminal Miscellaneous No. M‑115 of 1970).

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),

S. 417 read with S. 427 Bail‑Appeal against acquittal‑Incident immediately reported to police; accused clearly charged with having given fatal knife blows to deceased‑Names of three out of four witnesses mentioned in F. I. R.‑Witnesses having no ostensible reason to falsely implicate accused‑Order of acquittal in circumstances was open to question and High Court, held, right in refusing bail to accused‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302.

Khalid M. Ishaque, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mujahid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record on behalf of Syed Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for the State.

Date of hearing : 20th August 1970.

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑

The petitioner was acquitted of the charge under section 302, P. P. C. by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, against which the State filed an appeal under section 417, Cr. P. C., in the High Court. The learned Judges admitted the appeal and directed that non‑bailable warrants shall issue for the arrest of the petitioner.

On being taken into custody the petitioner moved the High Court for bail on grounds which went to the merits of the appeal. Another Division Bench of which one of the Judges who bad admitted the appeal was a party rejected the prayer on the view that there was no ground for reviewing the earlier order and that on merits too it was not a fit case for grant of bail.

In canvassing the petition for bail, Mr. Khalid M. Ishaque contended that the view expressed by the High Court that the earlier order for issuing non‑bailable warrants for the arrest of the petitioner was a bar to the maintainability of the application for bail was incorrect and drew our attention to the order of acquittal which in his opinion was well‑founded. We are unable to agree with the learned counsel. The occurrence took place at 9‑30 p.m. and the matter was reported to the Police at 9‑45 p. m In the report the petitioner was accused of having given the fatal knife blows to the deceased. Out of the four eye‑witnesses examined during the trial the names of three are mentioned in the F. I. R. None of these witnesses had any ostensible reason to falsely implicate the petitioner. In the light of these attending circumstances the order of acquittal was open to question and the High Court is right in refusing bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the appeal. The other contention raised by the learned counsel is also without any substance as the learned Judges after observing that there was no ground fur reviewing the earlier order did proceed to decide the question of bail on merits.

The petition is dismissed.

Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.