Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 182-B of 1982, decided on 1st March, 1982.

-- S. 148/302/307/149 and Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 173-Innocence of accused-Placing of name of accused persons in column 2 or 3 of challan, held, not of much material-Report under S. 173, Cr. P. C. to be looked into as a whole for reaching a conclusion whether accused have been declared innocent or not.

-- S. 497/498 and Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 148/302/307/149 Bail-Opinion of Police about innocence or guilt of accused-Not binding on Courts-May be relevant for purpose of bail as same may put Court on further inquiry-Police record containing two versions regarding innocence or guilt of petitioner requires further inquiry-Bail allowed.

1981 P Cr. L J 298 ; 1974 P Cr. L J 450 ; 1981 S C M R 849 ; 1979 SCM R177and PLD 1971 SC324rel.

Sh. Nisar Ahmed and M. Sultan Alam for Petitioner.

Niaz Bodla for the State.

Sahibzada Farooq Ali for the Complainant.

Date of hearing :1st March, 1982.

This is an application on behalf of Pannan petitioner in a case under section 148/302/307/149, P. P. C. registered at Police Station Ahmad Yar vide F. I. R. No. 35, dated 21st April, 1981.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner alongwith seven others in furtherance of their common object caused the death of Ali Ahmad and injuries to four P. Ws. So far as the petitioner is concerned it is alleged that .he was armed with a gun and fired at Ali Ahmad, who received four fire-arm injuries attributed to Pannan petitioner and Muhammad Khan co-accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been declared innocent by the D. S. P. Headquarter, Malik Ghulam Raider and S. I./S. H. O. Ahmad Khan and, as such, it is a case of further inquiry. Reliance is placed on 1981 P Cr. L J 298 and 1974 P Cr. L J 450.

4. Learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed this application. He contends that (1) the D. S. P., Pakpattan, who is the Halqa Officer, vide his report dated 8th June, 1982 has held the petitioner guilty and has ordered that he be challaned in column No. 3 alongwith the other accused and that the name of the petitioner has been placed in that column accordingly ; (2) that all the eye-witnesses have stated that the petitioner had fired at the deceased ; and (3) that the mere opinion of the Investigating Officer should not be believed. In support of these contentions, learned counsel has placed reliance on 1981 S C M R 849, 1979 S C M R 177 and P L D 1971 S C 324.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find ------

(i) that both sides have received injuries. On the side of the accused, Imtiaz accused received four blunt weapon injuries out of which one injury has been declared grievous. Ijaz co-accused received as many as seven injuries caused with blunt weapon, out of which one has been declared grievous. On the prosecution side, Ali Ahmad lost life and four persons received as many as 13 injuries including three grievous injuries caused to the P. Ws : and

(ii) that the report submitted by the police under section 173, Cr. P. C, reads as follows :--

I further find that column No. 2 pertains to :

Column No. 3 pertains to accused :

and column No. 4 pertains to accused who are challaned

6. I am of the considered opinion that placing of the name of the accused persons in column No. 2 or column No. 3 of the challan is not very much material. It is only the report under section 173, Cr. P. C. which is to be looked into as a whole for arriving at th conclusion whether the accused have been declared innocent or not. The report under section 173, Cr. P. C. is to the effect:

To my mind, this virtually amounts to this that the petitioner hasle beo found innocent during the investigation but the matter has bee the discretion of the Court.

7. So far as the contentions raised by the learned counsel Lahore the State are concerned, there is no denying of the fact that the opinion of the police about the innocence or guilt of the accused it not binding upon the Courts. To my mind, the opinion of the lice about the innocence of the accused is only relevant for the purpose of bail as the same may put the Court on further inquiry. Since the police record contains two versions about the innocence or guilt of the petitioner, the matter requires further inquiry. The petitioner is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (rupees twenty thousands) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A. C., Sahiwal.

MA.H. 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.