Find a Lawyer

Criminal Bail Application No. 422 of 1986, decided on 6th August, 1986.

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 114, 147, 148, 307, 332 504/149‑‑Bail grant of‑‑Ineffective firing‑‑Accused allegedly firing at complainant party and also on police party‑‑None suffering any injury‑ Dispute between complainant and accused party over raising of a wall‑ Prosecution conceding case to be of further inquiry‑‑Bail granted in circumstances.

1984 S C M R 378 ref.

Qurban Ali Chohan for Applicants.

Muhammad Ashraf Leghari for the State.

The applicants Muhammad Hussain, Qadir Bux, Hazoor Bux and Amir Bux alias Mir Muhammad are involved in crimes Nos. 150/86 and 151 of 1986, registered at Police Station Market, Hyderabad, on 25‑6‑1986. Crime No. 150 of 1986 was registered at 8‑45 a.m. on a report lodged by Abdul Haleem son of Abdullah, Crime No. 151/1986 was registered at 11‑30 p.m. on a report lodged by Munir Hussain S.I.P. Market P.S.

It is alleged in the F.I.R. of Crime No. 150/86 lodged by Abdul Haleem that the applicants /accused had dispute with them over raising of a wall intervening their house and that of the applicants /accused and on account of that dispute the applicants went in front of complainant's house and started abusing him and then made firing at the complainant, his brother Abdul Sattar and their relation Muhammad Amin. It is further alleged that applicant Muhammad Hussain was armed with a revolver, Hazoor Bux with a lathi, Qadir Bux with a double barrelled gun and Amir Bux also with a double barreled gun. The complainant reported the incident at Market P.S. where case was registered in respect of commission of offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 307 and 504 read with sections 149 and 114, P.P.C. It is next alleged that consequent upon the registration of Crime No. 150 of 1986, a police party headed by Munir Hussain ASIP went to the wardat of that crime and as soon as they reached there, they were fired upon from the house of the applicants and the police party also opened firing in defence and the police party succeeded In apprehending all the four applicants at the spot and recovered a revolver from applicant Muhammad Hussain, a double barreled gun from applicant Abdul Qadir; double‑barrelled gun from applicant Amir Bux, and a laths from applicant Hazoor Bux. On return to the police station, Munir Hussain SIP lodged report which was registered as Crime No. 151/86 in respect of commission of offences punishable under sections 147 148, 353, 332 and 307 read with section 149, P.P.C

The applicants moved bail applications in the Sessions Court, Hyderabad. Their bail applications were rejected by the learned Incharge Sessions Judge by order, dated 7‑7‑1988.

The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have been falsely involved at the instance of complainant Abdul Haleem on account of dispute between parties over raising of a wall. He has alleged that applicants were taken away from their house alongwith their licensed arms and falsely involved in the aforesaid cases. He has advanced argument that it is alleged that the applicants had made firing at the complainant party as well as at the police party and yet not a single person was wounded and that fact bore out that there was no incident of firing at the complainant party or at the police party. According to him, facts alleged in both the First Information Reports do not constitute an offence punishable under section 307. P.P.C. while other offences are bailable, He has placed reliance on an un‑reported order of a learned Judge of this Court in Criminal Bail Appeal No. 80 of 1985, decided on 20‑2‑1986, where bail was granted in a case of identical nature. He has alto cited another case reported in 1984 S C M R 378 in support of his submissions. The learned Advocate appearing for the State has conceded to the grant of bail in view of the fact that none was injured during the course of alleged firing by the applicants/accused and according to him, it is a case of further enquiry for determining the nature of the offence attributed to the applicants.

Applicants are alleged to have made firing at the complainant' party as well as at the police party but none from them suffered any violence. It is stated that there was dispute between the complainant Abdul Haleem and applicants over the raising of a wall. In the circumstances, the applicants are granted bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety each in each case. The surety to be furnished to the' satisfaction of Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

S. A. 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.