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

ABDUL RASHID versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CR PC) Section 497/498 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 302/307/34 Bullock: In connection with two ordinary suspects, the accused was granted bail on the charge of injuring only one witness.

1984 P Cr. LJ 1000

[Lahore]

Before Mazharul Haq, J

ABDUL RASHID AND ANOTHER-Petitioners

versus

THE STATE-Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 61-B of 1984, decided on 29th January, 1984.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-

-- S. 497/498-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/307/34-Bail c: Two gets of accused with common object-Accused responsible only, for simple injuries to a witness-Bail granted.

Shah Ahmad Khan Baloch for Petitioners.

Qurban Sadiq Ikram for the Complainant.

Nazir Ahmad Qureshi for the State.

ORDER

Abdul Rashid and Rab Nawaz petitioners alongwith five others are accused of the murder of Shah Nawaz and for having murderously assaulted Faiz P. W. The case was registered against them on 23rd June, 1983 at Police Station Qamar Masani, District Mianwali.

2. The occurrence took place over the dispute of right of way between the parties. Alam Khan, Madad Khan and Faiz were constructing a wall which according to the accused had obstructed their way. They stopped them, but the complainant party continued the construction. Rab Nawaz, Abdul Rashid and Faiz Muhammad son of Haqdad accused fired with 12 bore guns and caused simple injuries to Fait P. W. Another group of four accused went to the roof of their house from where they fired at Shah Nawaz who had gone to the roof of his house. Shah Nawaz died at the spot.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner did not cause any injury to the deceased and that the injuries caused by them to a witness were simple in nature. Learned counsel for the complainant and the: State counsel contended that there were two sets of accused with a common object and in view of the application of section 149, P. P. Q. each would be equally liable. Whether section 149, P, P. C. was applicable is a matter which can be gone into deeper at the trial stage The fact remains that the two petitioners are responsible for simple injuries to a witness. They are allowed bail in the sum of 25,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A. C./Duty Magistrate, Mianwali pending trial.

M. Y. 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.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
family advocate from Mirpur (AJK) 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.