Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Criminal Bail Application No.1369 of 19 6, decided on 14th September, 1986.
----S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307--Bail, grant of--Accused allegedly coming armed to complainant's house and firing but hurting no one--Contention that case against accused was motivated on account of political differences, duly finding support from documentary evidence--Accused allowed bail.
Nawaz A.Jajja for Applicants.
A.G. Mangi, A.A.-G. for the State.
Applicants are named as accused in a case for offence under Section 307/34 P.P.C. It is alleged that they came armed to the house of complainant and fired but luckily nobody was injured. Applicants applied for anticipatory bail before the High Court and vibe order dated 13-8-1986 they were granted protective anticipatory bail for seven days and were directed to appear before the Sessions Judge, Karachi (West). Their application was heard and dismissed vide order dated 13-8-1986 by Incharge Sessions Judge (West), Karachi on the grounds that applicants did not appear and secondly that on merit applicants did not have good case for bail. It would be worthwhile to mention here that Mr.Jajja, counsel for applicants had appeared and was allowed to argue bail plea on behalf of applicants were not present. Applicants again applied to the High Court for bail before arrest.
Bail plea is urged on two grounds. Firstly, that firing was ineffective and nobody was injured and even according to F.I. R. the Version is that there was knock at the door at 3.00 a.m. and complainant Baboo Amir Khan opened the door recognised three applicants who were armed with firearms and then shut the door after which applicants fired shots which hit door and the walls. It is other stated in F.I. R. that complainant raised cries after shutting the door which attracted neighbors who came and saw the applicants running away.
Second ground urged for pre-arrest bail is mala fides. It is Submitted on behalf of the applicants that area Councilor, who belongs to one particular political party is against the applicants and there are political differences between them as such that Councilor has acted as moving spirit behind this case in which applicants have been involved. It is submitted that complainant Baboo Amir Khan is also follower of that Councilor and in that context two documents have been produced. One is an application addressed to the Provincial Minister, Department of Ushr, Zakat and Religious Affairs making complaint against Baboo Amir Khan in which there are eight signatories, out of which No.1 is Akbar Khan, who is one of the applicants before me. Another document is letter purporting to have been written by Councilor addressed to Assistant Director K.D.A. In this letter, it is mentioned that Baboo Amir Khan would be available to go with the Assistant Director for the purpose of demolition of 'Jhuggis'. It is also recommended therein that 'Jhuggi' of Baboo Amir Khan is not to be demolished. This letter also shows that Councilor and Assistant Director of K.D.A. appear to be on friendly terms.
It is submitted on behalf of applicants that there is motivation involved in this case and the Councillor is instrumental in having this case filed against the applicants, who are his political opponents.
In the circumstances stated above, I confirm the bail on the same terms and conditions.
S.G.D./A-91/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