Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2285-B of 1981, decided on 24th August, 1981.

--- S. 497-Bail of petitioner accused of offence under S. 302, P. P. C. pressed on grounds (f) part attributed to petitioner belied and falsified by post-mortem report and not believable, (ii) medical evidence not in conformity with ocular testimony, (iii) petitioner a woman vicariously liable for act committed by co-accused-Held, case needs serious consideration and matter of further inquiry ----Bail allowed.

Begum Rehana Sarwar with Q. M. Saleem for Petitioner.

M. Saleem Shad for the State.

Date of hearing : 24th August, 1981.

This is an application for bail in a case under section 302/34, P. P. C. registered at P. S. Baghbanpura, Gujranwala, vide F. I. R. No. 313, dated 29th October, 1980.

The prosecution case is that Mst. Parveen Akhtar alongwith Ghulam Rasool in furtherance of their common intention caused the death of Ghulam Haider (husband of the petitioner) on the night between 28th and 29th October, 1980 in the house of the deceased situated in Mohallah Sharifpura.

So far as the petitioner is concerned, the allegations are that she had caught hold of the deceased by his arms and thereby facilitated his co -accused to strangulate the deceased.

2. Learned counsel-for the petitioner submits that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner has committed an offence punishable under section 302, P. P. C. inasmuch as the part attributed the co-accused, namely, Ghulam Rasool, stands belied and to b the post-mortem report. He further submits that, in fact, falsified the medical evidence is not in conformity with the ocular testimony that be petitioner is in jail for the last 10 months; that the part attributed to her that she had caught hold of the deceased is not believable t reasonable and prudent mind and that the petitioner, being a woman, her case falls within the first proviso to section 497, Cr. P. C.

3. As against this, learned counsel for the State submits that there are reasonable grounds to connect the petitioner with the commission of the alleged crime inasmuch as three eye-witnesses have implicated the petitioner while giving active participation to her in the alleged crime. He further submits that this murder was committed at her instance and her co-accused, namely Ghulam Rasool was, in fact, her paramour and that the alleged crime is punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

4. After having considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I find

(i) that the petitioner is a woman ;

(ii) that she did not cause the death of Ghulam Haider deceased and

(iii) that the part attributed to her that she had caught hold of the deceased at the time of the alleged occurrence and thereby is vicariously liable for the act committed by her co-accused in the circumstances of the case needs serious consideration and is a matter of further inquiry.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits lest it may prejudice the case of either side, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. The petitioner is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of

A. C., Gujranwala. Bail granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.