Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

FARID BAKBSH versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 was read with the Penal Code (XLV of 1860), the bail of section 149, the approval of the [murder case], the question of the contentious persons allegedly equipped with stats and As a result, only the deceased has not been hurt and has only been blamed. In order to end the crime, questions about fake liability are held, further investigation is needed if bail is allowed in this case.

1984 P Cr. L J 672

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

FARID BAKHSH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners

Versus

THE STATE-Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 250-B of 1982, decided on 16th March, 1982.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-

--S. 497 read with Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 149-Bail, grant of - [Murder-case] - Vicarious liability, question of-Petitioners allegedly armed with sotas yet causing no injury to deceased and being held responsible only for abetment of offence-Question of vicarious liability, held, required further inquiry in circumstances of case-Bail allowed.

Iqbal Ahmad Malik for Petitioners.

ORDER

This is an application for bail on behalf of Farid Bakhsh and Muhammad Sadiq petitioners, in a case, under section 302/148/159, P. P. C. registered at Police Station Seetpur, vide F. I. R. No. 79, dated 5th September, 1981.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioners alongwith 6 others in furtherance of their common object caused the death of Muhammad Bakhsh, on 5th September, 1981 at 3 p. m in the area of Mauza Muradpur South.

3. As for the petitioners, it has been alleged that they were armed with sotas and caught hold of the deceased in order to facilitate their co-accused namely, Hazoor Bux, Gul Muhammad and Ghulam Akbar to inflict injuries on the person of the deceased and thereby caused the death.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the peti tioners had not caused any injury to the deceased and in the circumstances of the case it cannot be believed that they would have caught hold of the deceased at the time of the infliction of injuries on his person by the co- accused. On the other side the learned State counsel has seriously opposed this application. He submits that section 148/149, P. P. C. stands clearly attracted to the case of the petitioners.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I find that al though the petitioners were armed with sotas and could easily inflict injuries on the person of the deceased yet they did not cause any injury to him and the allegation against them is that of abetment.

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the question of the vicarious liability of the petitioners in the peculiar circumstances of the case needs further inquiry. The petitioners are allowed bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (Rs, twenty thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Alipur.

S. G. D. Rail 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.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
top advocates from Tando Mohd Khan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.