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. 2836/13 of 1982, decided on 14th November 1982.
---S.497/498--Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordi nance (VI of 1979), S.17--Bail--Accused identified by two prosecution witnesses at identification parade held six months after occurrence--Objec tion raised that accused had already been shown to such witnesses--Co -accused charged with allegation of similar nature already released on bail--Bail granted to accused.
Muhammad Ali alias Mammi v. The State 1971 P Cr. L J 159 ref.
Dr. Farooq Chaudhary and Syed Sarfraz Hussain Shah for Petitioner. Begum Salma Tasaddiq Hussain for the State.
Waris Masih petitioner who is involved in an offence punishable under section 17 offence of Harabah (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, arising out of F.I.R. No. 187/81, dated 8th February, 1981 of Police Station, Sadar, Faisalabad, has submitted the instant petition for bail. He is in detention since 30th March, 1982.
2. It is alleged in the aforementioned F.I.R. that Abdul Khaliq and Muhammad Younis while on their way to Faisalabad on a motor-cycle on 1st August, 1981 in the evening were waylaid and forcibly deprived of a wrist watch and cash amounting to Rs. 800 by assailants who were nine in number. The occurrence allegedly took place on the bank of the canal near Chak No.204/RB. The offenders, of course, have not been. named in the F.I.R.
3. Waris Masih petitioner is alleged to have been identified by Abdul Khaliq and Muhammad Younis aforementioned at the identification parade held about more than six months after the occurrence.
4. No recovery has been effected from the petitioner. Challan has not yet been submitted. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the only incriminating circumstantial evidence against him is that he has been identified by two P.Ws. at the identification parade held in Jail about six months after the occurrence. It transpires from the records of the identification parade that the petitioner raised an objection before the learned Magistrate who held the identification parade that he has already been shown to the P.Ws. It has been held in Muhammad Ali alias Mammi v. The State 1971 P Cr. L J 159 that the accused who was not named in the F.I.R. and was identified as offender at the identification parade held six months after the occurrence was entitled to the concession of bail.
6. Shamoon Masih a co-accused of the petitioner, against whom there are allegations of similar nature has already been released on bail.
7. In the above circumstances and without prejudice to the merits of the case the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 30,000 (Rs. thirty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction) of A.C., Faisalabad.
M.Y.H. Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer