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 Application No. 777 of 1985, decided on 6th February, 1986.
‑‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 324/504/34‑‑Bail, cancellation of‑‑During a sudden fight one of accused causing a simple Lathi injury to complainant while other causing no injury at all‑‑Sessions Judge, held, rightly exercised discretion in granting bail before arrest to respondents, in circumstances‑‑Cancellation of bail refused.
A Mumtaz Ali for Applicant.
Ali Nawaz Ghanghro for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Zawar Hussain, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Applicant Haji Wali Muhammad Abbasi has filed this application under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail granted to respondents Ghous Bux and Deedar by Sessions Judge Larkana.
The relevant facts for the purpose disposing of this application are that on 8‑7‑1985 applicant went to his land there came Ghous Bux with Lathi, Deedar with gun and Mukhtiar with spade. They started abusing on which both exchanged harsh words whereupon Deedar fired from his gun in the air while Mukhtiar caused injury to Wali Muhammad on his head with spade and Ghous Bux inflicted Lathi blows. On cries and gun reports there came Miandad and Abdul Sattar who intervened and rescued the complainant.
2. Mr. Mumtaz Ali Siddiqi has argued that names of respondents are given in F.I.R. and conditions laid down for bail before arrest have not been complied with and still recoveries are to be made from the respondents.
3. Mr. Ali Nawaz Ghanghro appearing for the respondents contended that bail before arrest has rightly been granted by the learned Sessions Judge.
4. Mr. Syed Zawar Hussain, learned A.A.‑G. does not support the cancellation on the ground that no gun injury has been found on complainant, and Deedar has not directly fired at complainant party.
5. F.I.R. of this case was registered on 8‑7‑1985 under section 324/504/34, P.P.C, for bailable offences. Both the respondents and Mukhtiar were granted interim bail before arrest by the Incharge Sessions Judge by an order, dated 11‑7‑1985 on the basis of F.I.R. The matter came up before the learned Sessions Judge who by an order, dated 2‑11‑1985 confirmed the bail of respondents but refused bail to Mukhtiar. A He has observed in his order, that fight is sudden, therefore, each accused is individually responsible. He stated in the order that Deedar caused no injury to complainant and Ghous Bux caused simple Lathil injury.
The order is well reasoned and speaking order. The learned sessions Judge has rightly exercised his discretion in granting bail before arrest to respondents. It is also mentioned in the F .I. R. that Deedar fired in air and there is no allegation that he even made any attempt of fire at any one. The order is proper one and calls for no interference. Application is dismissed.
S . G . D. ‑‑‑‑‑ Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer