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 Miscellanous No. 400/B of 1984, decided on 28th May, 1984
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/307/148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Cross‑case‑‑S.P's report to D.I.‑G. stating that complainant party was aggressor and that accused was not present at time of alleged occurrence‑‑All accused in both cases released on bail excepting the accused petitioner‑‑Case of accused, held, of further inquiry‑‑Bail allowed.
Asif Saeed Khosa for Petitioner.
Malik Niaz Muhammad Bodla for the State.
Date of hearing: 28th May, 1984.
A case under section 302/307/148/149, P.P.C. was registered on 18‑4‑1983 regarding an occurrence which took place on 10‑11‑1982. In fact this case pertaining to F.I.R. No .83, dated 18‑4‑1983 was registered under directions in a writ petition by this Court as a cross‑case registered at the Police Station Saddar Vehari vide F.I.R. No.255/268, dated 10‑11‑1982. In both these cases all the accused accepting the present petitioner are on bail.
2. In support of this petition, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the S.P. Vehari in his report, dated 8‑5‑1983 to the D.I.‑G. Multan had stated that the complainant party of F.1.R. No.83 was aggressor had that the present petitioner Shah Muhammad was not present at the spot at the time of alleged occurrence. It is further contended that it is a case of cross‑version and has been got registered by the complainant party only to set up a counter‑version in the case registered against them under F.1.R. No.255/268, dated 10‑11‑1982. One man died on behalf of the party of Shah Muhammad petitioner, whereas two persons died on behalf of the complainant party pi of this case.
3. I have gone through the file of this case and I find that in the facts and circumstances, the case against the petitioner is that of further inquiry. He is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs.5,000 (rupees five thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C., Vehari.
M.A.K. Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer