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 Bail Application No. 650 of 1985, decided on 18th June, 1985.
---S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 307/466/452/504/148/149--Bail, grant of--Alleged abductee not attributing any overt act or any maltreatment or misbehaviour with her to applicant, in her statement recorded under S. 164, Cr.P.C.--Involvement of applicant in offence, held, required further inquiry, in circumstances--Applicant allowed bail.
Pir Mazharul Haq for Applicant.
M.I. Memon Addl. A.-G. for the State.
Date of hearing: 18th June, 1985.
The applicant alongwith several other co-accused is facing trial under sections 307, 323, 366, 504, 147, 148, 149 & 452, P.P..C. According. to the prosecution case, some other co-accused who were armed with guns, had fired at the complainant party but the present applicant Allah Rakhio was not armed with a gun but was armed with a Lathi. Further allegations that abductee Mst. Shaman and her three-month old daughter were forcibly taken away by all the accused. The F.I.R. was lodged on 26-3-1984 and the present applicant was arrested on 26-3-1984. The applicant filed a bail application but the same was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dadu, by order, dated 31 i0-1984. The abductee Mst. Shaman and her daughter were recovered from the possession of co-accused Shamoon Hajjam and her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. was recorded before the Resident Magistrate, Dadu, on 20-2-1985. A fresh bail application was filed by the applicant after the statement of the abductee had been recorded 164, Cr.P.C. but the second bail application was also rejected by order, dated 9-4-1985 of the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu. I have heard Mr. Pir Mazharul Haq, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.I. Memon learned Addl. A.-G. for the State who has opposed the bail application.
In the statement under section,164, Cr. P. C . the abductee has stated that about 7/8 persons had entered her house out of whom two or three persons had dragged her and abducted her and out-of these people she only knew accused Shamoon. She further stated that the abductors did not commit any maltreatment or misbehaviour with her. In her cross-examination she has stated as follows:-
Accused Shamman and other 2/3 persons jointly abducted me from my house. Again says that accused Shamman had rescued me from others and taken away himself and kept with himself. Accused Shamman has not committed any wrong or maltreatment with me. Accused Shamman had sent message to my relatives for my return but due to fear they did not come. I want to go with my husband. My husband is standing outside the Court and will go with him.
In my view in the case of the present applicant Allah Rakhio this is a case of further enquiry in so far as involvement of the applicant in the abduction of Mst. Shaman is concerned. Accordingly Criminal Bail Application No. 650 of 1985 is granted and applicant Allah A Rakhio son of Muhammad is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.2,000 with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
S.G.D.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer