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 No. 811/B of 1986, derided on 7th April, 1986.
‑‑‑S. 498‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 325/34‑‑‑Pre‑arrest bail, of‑‑F.I.R. lodged with delay of five days‑‑Medico‑legal report ex facie supporting defence plea that injury suffered by witness was not result of Sota blow but was result of fall‑‑Complainant party had malice against accused party due to election dispute‑‑Pre‑arrest bail granted in circumstances.
Ali Muhammad for Petitioner.
Ishtiaq Bokhari for the State.
Iftikhar Sipra for the Complainant.
Date of hearing: 7th April, 1986.
This is a petition under section 497/498, Cr.P.C. by Liaqat Ali, petitioner, for pre‑arrest bail in respect of a case instituted against him and one other under section 325/34, P.P.C.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 4‑3‑1986 at 2‑30 p. m. Liaqat Ali, petitioner, armed with a Sota, and Sharif empty handed, came to the shop of Tajjamal Hussain, complainant, where Muhammad Ismail P.W., the grandfather of the complainant, and Nasir Ahmad son of Sharif and Nasir son of Mukhtar P.Ws. were also present. Both started first abusing the complainant. Sharif, co‑accused, caught hold of the complainant by his neck and tried to pull him. Muhammad Ismail P.W. got up to save the complainant, whereupon Liaqat Ali, petitioner, inflicted a Sota injury on his left thigh, as a result of which he fell down.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the, petitioner, the complainant and the State. There is a delay of five days in the lodgment of the F.I.R. ex facie the medico‑legal report of Muhammad Ismail injured P.W. does not show any contusion, which should normally be found in respect of a Sota injury, but a swelling 24 c.m. x 18 c.m. It is the case of the petitioner that the injury on Muhammad Ismail P.W. was the result of the fall. It is also the contention of the petitioner that his father, challenged the elections of Azmat Ullah and since the complainant party were the supporters of the said Azmat Ullah they got the present case registered against the petitioner, to collusion with the local police, to humiliate him and his father. The petitioner has laid some foundation for malice. The State counsel submits that the petitioner joined investigation on two dates. The medico‑legal report ex facie does not show any bluish contusion. Without going on the record as having given any finding in matter, I would only say, for the ‑limited purpose of this bail petition, that the petitioner is entitled to be released on interim pre‑arrest bail.
4. For the foregoing reasons the interim pre‑arrest bail allowed to Liaqat Ali, petitioner, on 24‑3‑1986, is hereby confirmed.
H.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