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

MUHAMMAD USMAN versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 307/34 Guarantee, accused by the Eagle Squad Prima Fee charged with motivating the complainant to co-accused with the accused. Arrested accused may be charged with indiscriminate firing, empty responsibility for the crime, held, may not have been entitled to bail under conditions

1986 M L D 1810

[Karachi]

Before Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry J

MUHAMMAD USMAN‑‑Applicant

Versus

THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Criminal Bail Application No. 1218 of .1986, decided on 11th August 1986.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.307/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Vicarious liability‑‑Accused having motive against complainant‑ ‑Co‑accused accompanying accused, firing indiscriminately on complainant‑‑Accused arrested at spot by Eagle Squad‑‑Prima facie, vacarious liability for offence, held, could be attributed to accused ho was found not entitled to bail in circumstances.

Sardar Muhammad Ishaq for Applicant.

A.A. Muhammadally, A.A.‑G, for the State.

ORDER

The applicant is facing trial under section 307/34, P.P.C. wherein it has been alleged that on 21‑7 1986 the complainant had seen the present applicant selling the ‑ heroin in front of his house and the complainant asked him not to' do so but the applicant abused th<: complainant and at about 7‑30 p.m. he alongwith three persons came there and started firing at the complainant. The complainant jumped over from the place and saved his life. At that time a vehicle of Eagle Squad also appeared at the scene and they arrested the present applicant, and Fazal Qadir and the remaining two persons ran away from the; place of incident.

The learned counsel for the: applicant has‑slated that the applicant was not selling the heroin and no case of that nature has been registered against him. He has further stated that at the time when the applicant was apprehended, no arm was recovered by the police from the applicant and the fire‑arm was recovered from co‑accused Fazal Qadir. In these circumstances the applicant is entitled to bail.

In fact the applicant is the aggrieved person. He was prevented; by the complainant from selling the heroin. He had a motive in bringing; the co‑accused to the place of incident. The co‑accused made, indiscriminate firing on the complainant with fire‑arm. In these circumstances, prima facie, the vicarcious liability for the offence is' attributed to the present applicant. He is not entitled to bail. The; application is rejected.

S.A. Application dismisses.

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
best advocate from Sarai Alamgir 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.