Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1608/B of 1976, decided on 20th May 1976.

‑‑ S. 497‑Petitioners, accused of causing explosion with a hand -grenade, resulting in injuries to prosecution witnessed ‑‑Petitioners prima facie guilty of offence under S. 3 of Explosive Substances Act, punishable with death or imprisonment for life‑Bail declined, in circumstances.

Raja Said Akbar Khan for Petitioner.

Ch. Muhammad Sharif Oppal for the State.

Two daughters of Ali Asghar named Mst. Zubaida and Mst. Saeeda were to be married on 13-11‑1975 and two barat patties had come to Mohra Fatima. Fun was arranged for the marriage partied and is started at 10 p.m. Several persons collected there to enjoy the festival. At 2 a.m. Qurban Hussain, petitioner, his brothers Muhammad Iqbal and. Nazir, co‑accused, whose house was situated close to the house of Khan Muhammad, complainant, objected to that fun, but Sabir Hussain P. W. replied that the fun was going on in their own courtyard and nobody could stop them, whereupon Qurban, petitioner, abused Sabir Hussain and threw a hand-grenade and due to the explosion of that hand‑grenade, Sabir Hussain, Ali Akbar, Qasim, Muhammad Akhtar, Muhammad Azeem, Muhammad Afzal and Ghalib Hussain received injuries. Muhammad lqbal and Nazir, co‑accused, also fired gun and revolver shots. There was a civil litigation between Sabir Hussain and Qurban Hussain and Sabir Hussain had filed a civil suit and obtained a stay order in his favour. Qurban Hussain had a grudge against Sabir Hussain on account of that civil litigation. The injured witnesses were examined by the Investigating Officer and they supported the prosecution version as given by Khan Mohd, in the F, I. R. All of them were medically examined.

2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that co‑accused Iqbal and Nazir had been bailed out; that Nazir was found innocent and his name was shown in column No. 2 of the challan that the prosecution story was unplausible and ridiculous; that only a cracker was thrown by some person, which caused injuries to several persons; that father of the girls and other persons attending the marriage party did not come forward to support the prosecution case; that the police did not feel content with the present case and they involved the petitioner in another case under Arms Ordinance by planting a false recovery of pistol and three cartridges.

3. According to the prosecution version, Qurban Hussain, petitioner, and his brothers told the persons who were enjoying the fun to stop the fun to which Sabir Hussain did not agree on the ground that it was being held in the courtyard of their own house and nobody could stop them. On this reply, Qurban Hussain hurled abuses and threw a hand‑grenade, which caused injuries to the persons mentioned above. The injured persons supported the prosecution case. It was the anxiety of relatives to take the injured witnesses to hospital at Rawalpindi where they were medically examined. The offence; under section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Previously the punishment was transportation for life or imprisonment for a term, which may extend to ten years. By Act. XL of 1975 the sentence has been enhanced to death or imprisonment for life.

4. In view of the circumstances of the case, there appear reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is prima facie guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The petition is dismissed. This order will be without prejudice to the merits of the case.

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.