Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 879/13 of 1985, decided on 9th June, 1985.

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/149‑‑Five accused alleged to be armed with guns, three with rifles and one with pistol‑‑Only one fire arm injury found on deceased‑‑Investigating Officer finding case of cross‑firing by parties and according to investigation it was not known whose fire had hit deceased‑‑Fatal shot not attributed to any accused in F.I.R.‑‑Accused were allegedly armed with .12 bore guns but .12 bore pistols were allegedly recovered from them which were not shown to be connected with crime‑‑No empty recovered from spot‑ Accused, held, were entitled to be enlarged on bail in circumstances.

Ehtesham Qadir Shah for Petitioners.

Muhammad Iqbal for the State.

Sharif and Adil petitioners have moved this petition for bail in a case registered against them and seven others under sections 148 and 302/149, P.P.C.

The F.I.R. version is that on 8th April, 1984 at 7‑30 a.m. the petitioners armed with guns and their co‑accused Hanif, Sikandar and Muhammad also armed with guns, Jafar with a pistol and Nura, Nazil and Qutba armed with rifles came to the Ihata of Muhammad Amir complainant and started firing. Ahmad deceased was hit by a fire as a result of which he fell down and expired soon after. The motive for the offence was that the accused had a suspicion that the deceased was having illicit relations with Mst. Zainab wife of Jagdey.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the injury suffered by the deceased has not been attributed to any of the accused and for one fire nine persons have been implicated. It is further submitted that in this case three persons, namely, Muhammad, Hanif and Jafar, were found innocent during the investigation, therefore, prosecution version is highly doubtful. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail.

3. I have gone through the relevant material. According to the F.I.R., five persons were armed with guns, three with rifles and one with a pistol. According to the post‑mortem report, there was only one injury on the deceased. The case was investigated by the local police as well as by Muhammad Zar, Inspector C.I.A., Okara. In the Zimni dated 17‑7‑1984 the latter has stated that during the investigation it was found that there was cross‑firing by the parties and it was not known whose fire had hit the deceased. Even in the F.I.R. the fatal shot has not been attributed to any of the accused persons. According A to the F.I.R., the petitioners were armed with .12 bore guns but they are alleged to have led to the recovery of .12 bore pistols. No empty was recovered from the spot and the pistols allegedly recovered from the petitioners are not shown to be connected with the occurrence. In the circumstances, I feel inclined to the view that a case for the enlargement of the petitioners is made out. I, therefore, admit them to bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Okara.

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.