Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4121/8 of 1973, decided on 23rd October 1973.

‑‑--S. 497/498‑Bail‑Accused already involved in nine similar cases‑‑Likelihood of repetition of such offence to be considered seriously in bail matters‑Merits of case cannot however be simply ignored‑Accused on bail in all cases except present one ---Delay in lodging F. I. R. not explained satisfactorily‑Prosecution story not corroborated‑Strained relations between parties existing ---Bail allowed in circumstances of case‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307/34.

M. Anwar Sipra for Petitioner.

A. W. Butt for the State.

Pursuant to the registration of a case under section 307/34, P. P. C. the petitioner was arrested on 17th of September 1973. The prosecution story is that the petitioner had stolen some cattle belonging to Nawab Din complainant which had been got returned to its owner privately. The complainant thereafter got a case registered against the petitioner and got the cattle on Sapurdari. On the night between 28th and 29th of July 1973, the petitioner alongwith Iqbal atlas Bala and two unnamed persons went to the house of the complainant armed with guns and told him that they had come to take away the buffaloes. The complainant identified the petitioner and his co‑accused Bala by their voices and came in front of them alongwith his companions on which the petitioner and Bala started firing on the com plainant and his companions. The other two unnamed culprits also fired, but the shots passed over the heads of targets. Ghulam Rasul and Muhammad Rafiq, the companions of the complainant also fired but ineffectively.

2. The petitioner was arrested on 17th of September 1973, and the challan was filed in Court on 22nd of September 1973. It is established that there was ineffective firing on both sides and no empties were recovered from the spot. An unlicensed gun is said to have been recovered from the petitioner but in the absence of any of evidence it cannot be said that it was used in the commission of the offence. No evidence has yet been recorded.

3. The main argument that the learned counsel for the State advanced against the grant of bail was that there are nine other cases of cattle‑lifting and theft pending against the petitioner which relate to different Police Stations. It is his submission that the petitioner is likely to repeat these offences if he is enlarged on bail.

The learned counsel' for the petitioner on the other hand submits that the occurrence took place on the night of 28th and 29th of July 1973, and no satisfactory explanation for this delay of forty‑eight hours had been given by the complainant. The complainant said the petitioner was asking for his forgiveness and it is why he refrained from lodging the F. I. R. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no corroborative evidence suggesting the complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the offence.

4. The question whether an accused person is likely to repeat the offence does crop up in the matter of bail and has to be considered by the Courts seriously. The merits of the case before the Court, however, cannot be ignored simply because an accused person is also involved in a number of other cases. In all the cases in which the petitioner is involved, except this case, he was granted bail by competent Courts. The weight of the explana tion offered by the first information in regard to the delay for lodging the F. I. R. In the police station, which is at a distance of three miles from the place of occurrence, has to be assessed by the trial Court. There being no corroborative evidence to support the prosecution story and there being already a background of strained relations between the parties, I would prefer to direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees five thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Samundari.

Bail allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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