Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Appeal No. 61 and Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 56‑A of 1975, decided on 21st November 1975.
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 10‑7‑1975 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2474/8 of 1975).
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑
‑‑ S. 498‑Bail‑Culprit's names not mentioned in F. I. R.‑Informant associated with investigation and suspecting three others during first 17 days and thereafter mentioning four accused including petitioner as culprits‑Explanation given that he was not quite in his senses at time of making F. I. R.‑Case, held, fit for grant of bail notwithstanding order of commitment.‑[Bail‑First Information Report].
M. Ismal Bhatti, Senior Advocate, C. M. Latif Rawn, Advocate and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 1.
M. A. Bajwa, Advocate and Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 2.
Date of hearing : 21st November 1975.
‑The petitioner and his 3 co‑accused have been committed to the Court of Session to stand trial under section 302/34, P. P. C. for committing the murder of Bashir Ahmad. Ordinarily, thereafter the accused are not to be allowed bail but the Sessions Judge has; in the peculiar features of the case, allowed bail to the co-accused but denied this facility to the petitioner on the ground that he had allegedly fired the fatal shot at the deceased.
We have perused the record and find that in the F. I. R. the culprit names were not mentioned by Allah Yar, respondent. He was associated with the investigation conducted by the Police Officer Incharge and during the first 17 days he suspected 3 others for the murder. Thereafter he mentioned the four accused including the‑petitioner as the culprits. The explanation given was that he was not quite in his senses when he the F.I.R.
Besides the counsel for the petitioner, we heard Mr. M. A. Bajwa for Advocate General and Mr. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for, Ahmad Yar, private complainant. We do not wish to comment ' on 'the guilt WI innocence of the petitioner and his co‑accused. The result the trial twill depend on the quality of evidence produced by the prosecution arid the plea of defence. However, we do find it a case in which the petitioner may be allowed bail in spite of the order of commitment.
The petition is accordingly converted into an appeal and accepted with the direction that the petitioner may be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 and with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Multan.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer