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.329/B of 1984, decided on 11th April, 1984.
---S. 497(2)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302--Bail, grant of- Complaint made with delay of 9 days coupled with circumstances of joint pointation of dead body--Joint extra-judicial confession, conflicting between ocular testimony and medical evidence--Held: A case of further inquiry, in circumstances--Petitioners allowed bail,.
Niaz Ahmad Bokhari for Petitioners.
Tassaduq Hussain Jillani for the State.
Date of hearing: 11th April, 1984.
The petitioners are charged with the murder of Allah Bachaya deceased.
The motive for the offence was that Khuda Bakhsh petitioner suspected the deceased of carrying on, with his wife.
2. The petitioners are being connected with the offence by the following circumstances;
(a) Last seen.
(b) Ocular testimony furnished by Mahinwal P. W.
(c) Recovery of the dead body at their instance in the presence of a Magistrate.
(d) Extra-judicial confession before Jam Dur Muhammad.
(e) Recovery of wrist watch of the deceased from Wahid Bakhsh petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there is a delay of 9 days in making the report, that the medical evidence is in conflict with the ocular testimony, that the alleged recovery of the dead body was at the joint pointation of the petitioners and lastly that the alleged extra-judicial confession was also jointly made by the petitioners. Learned counsel further contends that according to Mahinwal P.W. the deceased was strangulated to death but the presence of a grievous sharp-edged weapon injury on his person belies him.
4. The fact that Mahinwal P.W. kept silent for 9 days after seeking the occurrence coupled with the circumstances of the joint pointation of the dead body, joint extra-judicial confession, conflict between the ocular testimony and the medical evidence would call for further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioners. Accordingly, I admit them to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Rajanpur.
S. G. D. Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer