Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2430-B of 1983, decided on 26th October, 1983.

---S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307/34--Bail--Petitioner remained behind bars for about six months--Question as to whether application of S.307/34 was proper required further consideration--Bail allowed.

Ch. Muhammad Hussain Chhachhar for Petitioner.

Tanvir Ahmed Khan Asstt. A.-G. for the State.

Date of hearing: 26th October, 1983.

In continuation of my order, dated 4-10-1983 learned Assistant Advocate-General has appeared alongwith the police officer who has brought the police record of this case. The record has also been received from the Court of the Illaqa Magistrate, Okara. A case was registered under section 307/34, P.P.C. against the petitioner and his co-accused who is on bail on 18-10-1982 at Police Station Sadar, Okara. The petitioner was arrested as late as on 5-5-1983. The reason for that was that he was granted interim pre-arrest bail after the registration of the case as against him and the next date of hearing of the said application was 17-11-1982 before the Sessions Court. But on that date he was waylaid and badly injured by the complainant party in the present case so much so that his left leg had to be amputated in the hospital where he remained for about five months i.e. uptil April, 1983. On his release from the hospital he again moved an application for his pre-arrest bail which was eventually dismissed on 5-5-1983, thus he was formally arrested in the instant case on 5-5-1983 when his application for pre-arrest bail was dismissed. The record indicates that the challan against him in the present case was sent up on 30-7-1983. It was fixed for trial on 7-9-1983 but the trial could not commence because the petitioner had not been brought from the jail and also due to the absence of the co-accused who had been admitted to bail. The next date fixed by the Magistrate was 12-10-1983 on which the petitioner appeared but the co-accused remained absent. As a result warrants of arrest for the co-accused were issued and the next date fixed was 26-10-1983 i.e. today. But since the record of this case had been summoned in this Court, no proceedings can be taken in the matter by the Magistrate today. This application for bail has been moved for the reason firstly that the petitioner has been behind the bars for a period of almost six months and the trial has not even commenced and secondly that the injury attributed to him was on a non-vital part and although grievous caused by a fire-arm, had not been declared dangerous to life, and that, therefore, the prima facie application of section 307/34, P . P . C . to the case of the petitioner and his co-accused required further consideration. Learned Assistant Advocate-General concedes that the petitioner has been behind the bars for a period of about six months and the trial has not yet commenced in the peculiar facts of this case. He also concedes that the petitioner is stated to have caused an injury with a fire-arm on the forearm of the victim Jalal Din and that this injury although declared grievous was not dangerous to life and that according to learned Assistant Advocate-General he may eventually be convicted under section 326, P.P.C. and not under section 307, P.P.C. Be that as it may, since the petitioner has been behind the bars for a period of about six months and furthermore there is also the question as to whether or not in the instant case the application of section 307/34, P.P.C. was proper requires further consideration. I admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Okara. This petition is disposed of.

S. A. /4333/L Bail allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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