Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 220/B of 1974, decided on 17th April 1974.

‑‑---S, 497/439‑Bail, cancellation of‑Solitary eye‑witness giving, contrary versions before two investigating agencies‑Case, held, fell within S. 497(2)‑‑Bail granted by Sessions Judge not cancelled in circumstances.

Kh, Shaukat Ali for Petitioner.

Ch. Rafiq Ahmad Bajwa for the Respondents.

Rashid Mahmood Malik for the State.

This is an application by Faiz Ahmad Khan son of Inayat Muhammad Khan for the cancellation of bail granted to Paskal alias Pasa and Harman alias Haro, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala vide his order dated 3‑1‑1974. The application was admitted only with regard to Harman and was dismissed as far as Paskal respondent No. 1 is concerned Today the matter has come for regular hearing. The respondents are accused of the murder of Asghar Ali. They are not given as the culprits in the F. I. R. although it is stated that a day earlier the deceased had mentioned that he had to recover Rs. 60 from the two respondents, which he would definitely recover on that date. He was killed during the night and was found dead by the complainant the next morning. During the investigation one Muhammad Ismail Chawkidar came forward as an eye‑witness of the occurrence and named the two respondents as the murderers.

2. The learned additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala granted them bail on the ground that the solitary eye‑witness gave two absolutely contrary versions of the incident. When he was examined by the local police be stated that he had beard a noise of women and children who were crying that their girl had been abducted and when he went over to the pond he saw Mst. Sohni, (the sister of the respondents), jumping from the wall). She was without her trousers (shalwar). He gave her a khes (KHES) to wrap herself. Thereafter he (Muhammad Ismail P. W.) peeped over the wall and saw Harman respondent injuring Asghar Ali deceased with his knife. The witness did not go forward out of fear and took Mst. Sohni to her house arid; thereafter went to sleep. The case was then transferred to the C. I. A. where the same witness gave a different version to Nazir Ahmad A. S. I., saying that on the night of the occurrence he had heard a noise from the quarter or the respondents. He went there, where he saw Harman respondent armed with a knife, Master Anthenie armed with a iota and Paskal respondent No. 1 standing nearby empty handed. Asghar Ali deceased was also present there and was demanding Rs. 60 from Harman respondent No. 2 but the latter refused to pay the money. Both of them were abusing each other. Then Master Anthenie gave a sota blow on the face of the decease wino fell down. Master Authenie and Paskal respondent No. 1 then held Asghar Ali by the arms while Harman respondent No. 2 gave blows on his neck and mouth, thus causing his death.

Thereafter the case was sent, for another investigation, to the Crime Branch and the same witness gave the original story about Mst. Sohni In this view of the matter the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Gujranwala rightly came to the conclusion that since Muhammad Ismail Chawkidar was giving different versions about the same incident, the case felt under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr. P. C. inasmuch as there were sufficient grounds for further inquiry about the guilt of the accused/ respondents. I think the bail was rightly granted to the respondents ands see no reason for cancelling the same. The petition is therefore, dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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