Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 932/B of 1983, decided on 25th May, 1983

-----Ss. 497 & 498-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302-Bail Murder-Prosecution evidence consisting only of statements of persons before whom dead body recovered and there being no corroborative evidence-Case of further inquiry-Bail granted.

A Khan Muhammad Bajwa for Petitioner.

Shabbir Lali for the State.

Date of hearing : 25th May, 1983.

petitioner seeks tail in case F. I. R. No. 236/82, dated 16th August, 4982, registered at Police Station Mandi Bahauddin, under section 302/201, P. P. C. According to the F. I. R. Dildar Ali, S. I./S. H. O. received secret information that the petitioner suspected his daughter, who was married with Abbas, of immorality" and so had murdered her and had buried the dead bony. On this information F. I. R. No. 236/82, was registered. On the same day the petitioner was taken into custody. During interrogation, petitioner disclosed in the presence of Abdul Hamid and Muhammad Ashraf P. Ws. that his daughter Mst. Nusrat Bibi, who was married to Abbas, had started indulging in immoral activities, feeling aggrieved and ashamed he had done her to death by strangulation by wrapping a dopatta around her neck and had buried her dead body in his house near water pump. The petitioner was arrested. He led to his house wherefrom dopatta, regarding which it is alleged teat he had used for strangulating the deceased, was got recovered. On his pointing out, dead body of Mst. Nusrat Bibi was also recovered after digging the earth near the water-pump in his house. The doctor who had conducted the post-mortem opined that time between death and post-mortem was 1 to 11 months. There is no other incriminating evidence. Even the statement of the husband of the deceased bas trot been recorded.

2. The fact deposed to before the police is only admissible to the extent as discovered in consequence of the information given or statement made. In this case, the dead body was recovered after the disclosure made by the petitioner before Abdul Hamid and Muhammad Ashraf P. Ws. The evidentiary value of their statements will be judged at the trial keeping in view the provisions of section 27 of the Evidence Act......................... ..

3. It is contended that the house from which the dead body is alleged to have been recovered was in possession of Muhammad Ismail, Constable, who was residing in the house as a tenant since July, 1982, meaning thereby that on the alleged date of recovery of dead body, the house was in occupation of another person as a tenant. Affidavits of four persons, including Shan Muhammad Councillor, have been filed, according to which the house wherefrom the dead body was recovered was in possession of Muhammad Ismail, Constable, as a tenant from lst July, 1982 to 26th August, 1982 and that on the cosy of alleged recovery, the house was got vacated by the police from the Constable.

4. Keeping in view the fact that the prosecution evidence con sists only of the statements of two persons before whom the dead body was recovered and there is no corroborative evidence, I feel it is a case of further inquiry. The petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Mandi Bahauddin.

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.