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 Miscellaneous No.563/B of 1987, decided on 17th March, 1987.
---S.498--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.307, 365 & 342--Bail, grant of--Accused not alleged to have caused any injury to any one and only ineffective firing attributed to him--Interim bail, already granted, confirmed.
Rana Ejaz Ahmad for Petitioner.
Qamar-uz-Zaman Khan for the State.
Date of hearing: 17th March, 1987.
Muhammad Buta petitioner has moved this petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him and others under sections 307, 365 and 342 read with section 34, PPC .
2. The prosecution version is that on 2nd February, 1987 at 6-30 p. m. Safarish Ali complainant and Muhammad Akram were returning from village Malikpur when Muhammad Buta petitioner armed with a .12 bore gun, co-accused Ashraf armed with a carbine, his father Barkat and co-accused Furqan armed with dangs, confronted them and challenged Muhammad Akram that he would not be spared. Co-accused Barkat asked the others accuses to take way Muhammad Akarm to their Haveli, upon which all the accused forcibly took him to their Dera. On reaching there, Barkat asked the other accused to finish Muhammad Akram upon which co-accused Ashraf fired at him hitting his back. In the meantime, Safarish Ali started running. Muhammad Buts petitioner chased him and fired at him but luckily he escaped unhurt. Motive alleged, in the FIR was that the land of Barkat etc. (accused) was adjacent to the land of Muhammad Akram injured. The accused party was teasing Muhammad Akram and his father since long so that they may abandon the land, but Muhammad Akram had all along been resisting their attempts. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this case is absolutely false and the fact of the matter is that Muhammad Akram injured tried to forcibly take away Mst. Fardaus, minor daughter of Barkat ca-accused, and on hearing hue and cry, her brother Ashraf fired at him to rescue her. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not at all present at the spot and the police wants to arrest him for extraneous considerations at the behest of the complainant party. The learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail.
3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties in the light of material available on the record. In the zimni dated 7-3-1987 the ASP has stated that local inspection and general investigation has revealed that Muhammad Akram injured alongwith another person who was armed with pistol/carbine, came on the back side of the Dera of Barkat in order meet his daughter Mst.Fardaus. Muhammad Ashraf, brother of Mst. Fardaus, fired at Akram and thereafter the complainant party carried him to their Dera but his companion who was armed with pistol/carbine, ran away from there, according to the accused party, aforesaid companion of Muhammad Akram was one Kalu Christian. The complainant party was asked several times to produce him but they failed to do so. In the zimni it has been further stated that some evidence regarding presence of Muhammad Buta had also come forth which required verification. Learned counsel states that the petitioner is the son-in-law of aforesaid Barkat. The petitioner is not alleged to have caused any injury to anyone. Only ineffective firing has been attributed to him. In the circumstances, I feel inclined to the view that a case for the grant of bail is made out. The interim bail is, therefore, confirmed.
M. Y. H./M-284/L Interim bail confirmed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer