Section 497 (2) Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 395 Bail, Grant of Further Inquiry Initially, a case was registered against 18/19 unidentified robbers, but during investigation, 18 persons were convicted of the crime. As was designated, the supplementary statement that was later recorded after more than two months of delay in filing an FIR, based on an additional statement, revealed that there was no need to link the accused to the alleged crime. Solid grounds were not complained of. Rather, it was claimed that through an (unknown) source, the complainant found out that the accused had been lodged against all the accused by all the accused in the supplementary statement, the responsibility of the Investigation Officer. He had to manage it. The identification parade, but the investigating officer failed to do so, none of the items / materials recovered from the possession of the accused during the investigation were recovered, temporarily speaking, the accused was not linked to the alleged crime. That the model number of the cellphone recovered from one of the accused is not compatible with the loot cellphone as stated in the FIR as having a joint article with the accused cellphone, the first person cannot be linked to the accused. Was. He further stated that in the circumstances of section 497 (2) for specific circumstances, further investigation of his crime was required. The PCP Accord was not even charged against the accused, who has long been accused. For a long time the convictions had been tolerated; the preliminary hearing of the trial was a valuable right of every accused, but it was denied that the accused persons, in the circumstances, were later convicted.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
