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 Miscellaneous No. 2224-B of 1981, decided on 29th August, 1981.
-- S. 497-Bail-No injury caused with sharp-edged weapon or by a tringle found.on person of deceased-Case, held, requires further inquiry into guilt of accused and bail allowed.
Muhammad Ismail Qureshi assisted by Sardar Ahmad Khan for Petitioners.
Nazir Ghazi for the State.
Date of hearing : 29th August, 1981
This is an application for bail on behalf of Ghulam Mustafa, Manzoor Shah son of Syed Muhammad Shah. Muhammad Ali Shah, Basir Shah, Khan Muhammad, Manzoor and Nazir Hussain Shah petitioners in a case under section 302/307/148/149, P. P. C. registered at Police Station Kot Samaba vide F. I. R. No. 7481.
The allegations against the petitioners are that they in furtherance of their common intention armed with various weapons caused the death of Muhammad Shafi and injuries to Muhammad Rafiq P. W. on 29th May, 1981 at 5 p. m. in the area of Chak No. 78.
It is alleged that Muhammad Ali Shah and Khan Muhammad were armed with hatchets, Manzoor Shah son of Muhammad Shah petitioner No. 2 with tringle and the remaining with sotas. It is alleged that all of them caused injuries to the deceased as well as Muhammad Rafiq P. W.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the part attributed to the petitioners that they caused injuries to the deceased is not supported by the medical evidence which shows that, in fact, the deceased had received four injuries on his person caused with blunt weapons. He further submits that in the F. I. R. as well as in the statements under section 161, Cr. P. C. the, injuries have not been specifically attributed to any one ; that Manzoor Shah was found injured and his injury has not been explained in the F. I. R. ; that it was a case of free, fight and a sudden flare up and lastly Muhammad Ali and Nazir Hussain raised the plea of alibi during the investigation which was supported by several witnesses.
3. On the other, hand, learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant seriously opposes this petition. He argues that names of the petitioners are mentioned in the F. I. R. there is no doubt as to the identity of the petitioners ; question of substitution does not arise ; plea of alibi is not borne out from the record, specific role, in the circumstances of the case, iii fact, could not be attributed ; all the accused are equally liable under section 149, P. P. C. for an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life ; recoveries have been effected and that the Chemical report is in the positive.
4. After-hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that several points raised by the learned counsel for the parties travel beyond the scope of tentative assessment and can be properly appreciated at the time of trial ; that no injury caused with sharp-edged weapon or by a tringle was found on the person of the deceased ; that the sharp edged injuries found on the person of Muhammad Rafiq P. W. have, been declared simple and the only grievous injury found on his person was caused with a blunt weapon.
5. In these circumstances I am of the opinion that for the purpose of bail the case of Muhammad Ali Shah, Manzoor Shah and Khan, Muhammad who allegedly were armed with hatchets, and tringle is, at least, distinguishable and requires further inquiry. They are accordingly allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with one surety, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of A, C., Rahimyarkhan.
No case for bail with regard to other petitioners is made out. Their prayer for bail is rejected.
Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer