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 Petition No. 111 of 1982, decided on 25th April, 1982.
(Against the order of the Lahore High Court, dated 3‑3‑1982, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 450/B/82).
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑
----Ss. 497 & 498‑Bail‑Contention that only witness mentioned in F. I. R. having filed an affidavit stating to have not seen occurrence, petitioner entitled to be released on bail‑Held: Even if such witness be assumed to have not seen occurrence, complainant being also a witness would support prosecution case and High Court in circum stances justified in dismissing bail application.
Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanveer Ahmad, Advocate-on‑Record for Petitioners.
Date of bearing : 25th April, 1982.
Through this petition Sanaullah, Mansha, Ata Ullah and Khan, petitioners seek Leave to Appeal against the dismissal of their bail application by the High Court vide order dated 3‑3‑1982. They are accused, inter alia, for offence under section 148/ 302/307/324/365/ 451/149, P. P. C. The F.I.R. was lodged by Muhammad Ilyas (P. W.) who also suffered as many as 10 injuries during the incident out of which 3 were incised wounds. The only ground urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the petition was that the only witness mentioned in the F.I.R. namely, Nasrullah (P. W.) has filed an affidavit that he had not seen the occurrence. Even if it be assumed that he had not seen the occurrence it is admitted that Muhammad Ilyas, the complainant in the ease, who is also an eye‑witness, would support the prosecution case.
In the view of this matter, the High Court was justified in dismissing they bail application. The petition is consequently dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer