Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2879/B of 1985, decided on 15th January, 1986.

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 323, 325, 452, 506, 148 e 149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused alleging that they were falsely involved due to election dispute‑‑Fact of dispute of election not denied by either party‑‑Incorporation of S.307, P.P.C. at later stage indicating that authorities had not considered case to be falling under S.307, P.P.C.‑. Only injury on vital part of injured 'person was found simple‑‑Injury on vital part was not ascribed to accused /petitioners but was ascribed to one of co‑accused‑‑Whether assailants had entered house by way of trespass or otherwise, could not be adjudicated upon at time of decision of bail as statement of owner of house was not available on record‑ Accused were behind bars for more than four months‑‑Bail granted to accused in circumstances.

Aitzaz Ahsan and Khalid Mahmood for Petitioners.

Kh. Sultan Ahmad for the Complainant.

Farooq Bedar, Asstt. A.‑G. for the State.

Date of hearing: 15th January, 1986.

Petitioners seek bail in case F.I.R. No. 313 Police Station Shahdara, District Lahore registered under sections 323, 325, 452, 506, 148, 149, P.P.C. on the statement of Muhammad Saleem. According to the complainant he had gone to the house of Muhammad Hanif on 4‑9‑1985. His brother Muhammad Amin had also come there. At about 1.30 a.m. the petitioner accompanied by Altaf Hussain, Shabbir, Sarfraz Hussain, Muhammad Naeem, Taj Din and Muhammad Iqbal, armed with Sarias (iron bars), entered the house of Muhammad Hanif and attacked him (the complainant). Muhammad Akbar had caused him an injury on the head while Muhammad Yousaf and Muhammad Iqbal, alongwith others had given him injuries on the legs and other parts of the body.

2. The occurrence, according to the complainant, was witnessed by his brothers Muhammad Amin and Tasleem. He has also mentioned that he was rescued by the residents of the Mohallah, but none of them has been named.

3. Motive for the occurrence was a dispute regarding election to the offices of the Labour Union.

4. Offence under section 307, P.P.C. was added later on.

5. Learned counsel foe the petitioners contended that the petitioners have been falsely involved in this case due to Labour Union elections; that the only injury on the vital part, i.e. head, was declared simple and the same has been ascribed to Muhammad Akbar co‑accused who is not the petitioner; that no specific allegation has been made against any of the petitioners of having caused any specific injury and that they are in jail for the last more than four months.

6. Learned Assistant Advocate‑General and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the grant of bail. It is contended by them that the petitioners while armed with deadly weapons, had launched attack after trespassing the house of Muhammad Hanif and had caused as many as 12 injuries to the complainant, as a result of which left leg of the complainant was fractured.

7. The fact of the dispute as a result of the Labour Union elections, is not denied by either of the parties. Although, section 307 was incorporated later on, but the fact remains that the only injury on the vital part i.e. the head, was found simple. That injury specifically is ascribed to Muhammad Akbar, who is not the petitioner before me.

8. Whether the assailants had entered the house by way of trespass, or had gone there in some other connection, cannot be adjudicated upon at this moment as the statement of owner of the house is not available on record. The case originally was registered under sections 323, 325, 452, 506, 148, 149, P.P.C. etc. which means that the authorities had not considered the case to be falling under section 307, P.P.C.

9. Keeping in view the above facts, and particularly the fact that the petitioners are behind the bars for the last more than four months, I feel inclined to exercise discretion in their favour. They shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rupees fifteen thousand each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, City, Lahore/trial Magistrate.

H.A.K. 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.