Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 80 of 1983, decided on 20th July, 1983.

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused neither charged in F.I.R. of having committed offence nor in supplementary statement of complainant‑‑Complainant charging him in subsequent supplementary statement recorded after three days‑‑Further inquiry needed into guilt of accused‑‑Accused ordered to be released on bail.

Dost Muhammad Khan for Petitioner.

S. Ibne Ali, A.A.‑G. for the State.

Date of hearing: 20th July, 1983.

This is an application for the grant of bail on behalf of Dara Shikoh son of Mir Shah Subhan, resident of Hussain Khel Issaki, P.S. Saddar, tehsil and district Bannu. The accused‑petitioner stands charged under section 302, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. No. 125, date 17‑3‑1983.

2. The accused‑petitioner applied for bail to the Ileqa Magistrate, who admitted him to bail vide order, dated 6‑4‑1983 but on the application of the complainant to the Sessions Judge, Bannu, the latter cancelled the same vide order, dated 10‑4‑1983.

3. Learned counsel for the accused‑petitioner vehemently argued that their client is not charged in the first information report; that the complainant who lodged the report made a supplementary statement on the same day of incident wherein too he has no charged the accused petitioner for the commission of the offence; that the only piece of evidence available on record against the accused‑petitioner is his confessional statement but the same was recorded after about ten days of police custody, and, therefore, it should be kept out of consideration as the accused‑petitioner has repudiated the same.

4. Learned Additional Advocate‑General appeared for the State and opposed the bail application. I have gone through the entire case with the help of the learned counsel for the parties and have come to conclusion that there is need of further inquiry into the guilt of the accused‑petitioner. Admittedly he is neither charged in the F.I.R. nor in the supplementary statement of the complainant, dated 17‑3‑1983. However, the complainant has charged him in his subsequent supple mentary statement recorded on 20‑3‑1983, wherein he has also furnished the motive, but has failed to give any explanation about the source of his such information. As such, without going deep into the merits of the case, accept this petition and release the accused‑petitioner on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties for the like amount ea(‑h, to the satisfaction of the Ilaqa/Duty Magistrate.

5. Before parting with the case, I must remark that the above assessment of the material on record is only tentative for the grant of bail and the trial Judge will be at libery to come to any conclusion after recording the prosecution evidence.

S.A Appeal accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.