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.348 of 1961, decided on 13th May, 1987.
---S.497(2)--Penal Code (.XLV of 1860), Ss.365, 342, 506 & 307- Offence of Mina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.12--Bail, grant of--Incident allegedly had taken place in the heart of city but first information report delayed in spite of fact that complainant had a motor cycle Such fact coupled with fact of admitted enmity between parties requiring further inquires as contemplated by S.497(2), Cr.P.C.--Bail granted.
Qurban Ali H.Chohan for Applicant.
A . A . Mohammedally, Asstt. A.-G. for the State.
The applicants have filed separate bail applications. Since they have been refused bail by the same order, I will therefore dispose of them together. The facts of the prosecution case in brief are that the applicant Sarfraz and others abducted Karamat Ali and Razaullah from a place near Metro Petrol Pump Latifabad, Hyderabad on the night between 13th and 14th of April, 1981. The applicant Sarfraz is alleged to have been armed with a revolver. The victims were however left by the applicants after making them naked and taking different poses showing that they were committing sodomy with each other Such information was given at the police station Cantt. Latifabad which was recorded as N.C. by the police on 14-4-1981 at 2.00 A.M. which was subsequently incorporated in the 154, Cr.P.C. book as F.I.R. The police after usual investigation sent up the applicants to stand trial under sections 365, 342, 506, 307, PPC; read with section 12 of Offences of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
The application for bail was moved before the learned Sessions Judge, Hyderabad who by his order dated 9-5-1981 dismissed it.
The learned counsel for the applicants contends that there is delay of four hours in lodging the FIR in spite of the fact hat the incident is alleged to have taken place in heart of the city. It has also been contended by him that the complainant has not rushed tc the police station though he was on motor-cycle. Moreover there being allegation of firing against the applicants as well as other assailants but no fire-arm injury has been reported on person of anybody. There is also admitted enmity between the parties over election of cricket association therefore possibility of involving the applicants falsely cannot be ruled out under the circumstances of the case. Their case therefore comes within scope of further inquiry as contemplated by Section 497 (2) Cr:P.C.
The learned Asstt. A.-G. concedes to grant of bail to the applicants subject to furnishing heavy sureties by the applicants.
I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicants as well as State. The incident is undoubtedly alleged to have taken place in heart of city. The FIR being undoubtedly delayed in spite of the fact that the complainant was having a motor cycle coupled with a fact of admitted enmity between the parties are such factors which require further inquiry as contemplated by section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, I grant bail to both of them. They shall be released on furnishing their solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.10,000 each and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
M. Y. H./M-215/K Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer