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 Bail Application No. 641 of 1981, decided on 30th August, 1981.
‑‑ S. 497‑Bail‑[Murder‑case]‑Applicant assigned role of raising lalkara and instigating co‑accused to cause injuries while himself standing on top of adjoining house‑Bail allowed, in circumstances.
Sikandar v. State 1980 S C M R 79 ref.
Shamshud Ahmad Khanzada for Applicant.
A. A. Mohomedally, A. A.‑G. for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that applicant Aziz Masih and 11 others are being tried for offence under sections 301, 307, 148 and 149, P. P. C. It is the case of the prosecution that 11 accused persons specifically named in F.I.R. were armed with hatchets and daggers entered the house of deceased on 13th July, 1981 at 1 p. m. by breaking open the door and caused injuries to Munir Masih and complainant Taj Masih. There was enmity between the parties over abduction of woman which took place sometime ago. In the result of injuries Munir Masih died and it is stated that he had sustained x injuries which were incised in nature. Complainant Taj Masih also sustained 4 injuries out of which 3 were incised and one lacerated. Complainant Taj Masih had himself dictated 'F.I.R. in which he has given graphic account of incident. Part assigned to present applicant Aziz Masih by the) prosecution is that he raised lalkara' and instigated other accused persons to cause injuries and he himself was on the top of adjoining house. Such allegation is not wade in F. I. R, but it is stated in the interim challan that it has transpired from the police statements of the eye‑witnesses that present applicant had instigated from the roof of another house. No recovery is made from the present applicant. The learned counsel for the applicant stated that the question of complicity of the present applicant in the commission of crime, in the circumstances stated above, is going to be decided by the trial Court subsequently after recording of evidence and evaluation thereof as such it is the matter for further inquiry and the applicant is entitled to bail under section 497 (2), Cr. P. C. He has cited 1980 S C M R 79 in support of that proposition. Mr. A. A. Mohammadally, A. A.‑G. has also no objection. Applicant is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with one surety and P R in' like amount to the satisfaction of the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi.
Ball allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer