An attempt to compel Section 497 (2) of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), section 324/34, to impose a bail, the defendant's denial was that there was a cross version of the incident in the subsequent FIR. Thus, he was entitled to the exemption on bail after his FIR was filed several hours later when his complainant received details of the other party being injured and injured in his The delay in filing of the FIR was allegedly counter to the case after which the first FIR was not charged. Earlier in the arrest and post-arrest requests, the accused was charged directly with the landowner in the cross-border case as the complainant suffered a firearm and the proposed sentence for the alleged offense was prohibited under section 497. Came under CCP's charge, after the CCP alleged that he had fled to escape bail, on bail he was denied the accused.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
