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. 2196/11 of 1982, decided on 8th September, 1982.
--S.497-Bail, grant of-(Murder-case)-Contention that petitioner being a student, may be allowed bail to facilitate him to appear in Matriculation examination-Occurrence a daytime affair leaving hardly any doubt regarding identity of accused--Complainant having enmity with nobody else except father of accused-Complainant also having no reasons to substitute petitioner for real culprit-Bail, declined in circumstances but direction given to provide all reasonable facilities to petitioner while in custody, to prepare for examination and to appear at examination centre.
Bashir Ahmad Bhatti for Petitioner.
Aziz Qureshi for the State
Date of hearing : 8th September, 1982.
The petitioner is accused of committing the murder of Mst. Elahi Sain, wife of the complainant. The occurrence took place on 11th June, 1982 at about 7.30 a. m. in the house of the deceased. She was allegedly shot twice by the petitioner and she died at the spot. The motive for the occurrence is a dispute regarding a Ahata which belongs to the father of the petitioner and to spite of repeated requests, was not being vacated by the husband of the deceased.
2. The learner counsel for the petitioner has argued that there is a delay of two hours in lodging of the F, I. R. and that the witnesses are chance witnesses He has also argued that this was an unseen occurrence and the petitioner has been roped in order to pressurise him regarding the possession of the Ahata.
3. No opinion can be expressed regarding the reliability of witnesses at this stage. Whether they were present at the spot at the time of occurrence or not can come out only when they appear at the trial. The contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been substituted for the real culprit prima facie has no basis. I have gone through the record of investigation; There is nothing in the record to show that the complainant had enmity with anybody other than the father of the petitioner. It is a day light occurrence. Therefore, there can hardly be any doubt regarding the identity of the assailant.
4. The petitioner according to the school certificate was 161 years old at the time of occurrence. He is a student of 10th class and has to appear in the Matriculation examination starting from 15th September, 1982. He cleared some of the papers in his previous attempt last year and has to clear some papers this year as be was placed in compartment. The learned counsel has argued that on this ground the petitioner may be re leased on bail.
5. As discussed above the merits of the case do not justify the grant of bail to the Petitioner. He is not below 16 and is, therefore, not entitled to the concession given in the proviso to subsection (1) of section 497. His desire to sit in the Matriculation examination starting from 15th September, 1982 is, however, genuine but it is not necessary to release him on bail merely on this ground. Arrangements can be made while he is in custody in order to facilitate his preparation for the examination and appearing at it.
In view of the above considerations, the application for bail is dismiss ed, but it is directed that the petitioner will be provided with all the reasonable facilities while in custody to prepare for the examination and. to appear at the examination centre.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer