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. 1583‑R of. 1977, decided on 28th June, 1977.
‑‑- S. 497‑Bail of petitioner accused of offences under S. 302/34, P. P. C. pressed on grounds (i) no eye‑witness available and only allegation against petitioner being that he abetted co‑accused to snatch money from deceased ; (ii) extra‑judicial confession allegedly made by petitioner and co‑accused being of nature of joint statement as such inadmissible in evidence ‑ Bail allowed, in circum. stances.
Sardar Shaukat Ali for Petitioner,
Khalil Ramdey, A. A.‑G. for the State.
Date of hearing : 28th June, 1977.
This is a petition for bail by Muhammad Ali petitioner who alongwith three others is involved in a case under section 302/34/109 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The F. I. R. was lodged by Bashir son of Muhammad Din deceased on 23rd February, 1977 at 9‑30 a. m. at Police Station, Kasur wherein he alleged that on the same morning he was inform ed by gadar Din that his father who used to reside at the tubewell of one Mahmud Ahmad, was lying murdered there. He reached the spot and found his father lying dead in a pool of blood. He also found two foot prints at the spot and preserved them.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is no eye‑witness in this case and the only allegation against the petitioner is that he abetted his co‑accused to snatch the money from the deceased, there fore, there are no reasonable grounds for believing that he was guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years. He further submits that the extra‑judicial confes sion allegedly made by the petitioner and his co‑accused being in the nature of a joint statement, is inadmissible in evidence. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General is not in a position to controvert these contentions. The order of the learned Sessions Judge also shows that the allegation against the petitioner was that he "sent his co‑accused to the tube‑well to snatch money from Noor Din deceased." In the circum stances, I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner was guilty of the offence with which he has been charged. Consequently, I admit him to bail in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Kasur.
Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer