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. 2122/13 of 1982, decided on 5th September, 1982.
‑‑‑S. 497 ‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.364‑A‑‑Bail‑‑Accused alleging that his teasing of daughter of complainant prompted complainant to bring about case of child‑lifting against him‑‑No previous enmity existing between parties‑‑Complainant, a responsible businessman and no reason available for false implication of accused‑‑Teasing of girl, held, could be a motive for false implication as well as a motive for accused to commit offence in retaliation of reprimand given to accused by father of girl‑‑Bail refused.
Rab Nawaz Khan Niazi for Petitioner.
S.D. Qureshi for the State.
According to the allegations the petitioner used to tease the daughter of the complainant who is a student of 8th Class for which the complainant reprimanded the petitioner. It is alleged that in retaliation the petitioner picked up Khaliqur Rahman aged 2 years grand‑son of the complainant and left him only when he was given a chase by the father of the child and other witnesses.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the allegations of an offence under section 364‑A, P.P.C. against the petitioner are false and that the case has been made out only on account of the teasing of the girl by the petitioner. I am afraid, I find no force in this argument particularly when it is an admitted position that there is no previous enmity between the parties. The complainant is said to be a responsible businessman and no reason has been given for false implication of the present petitioner. The teasing of the girl by the petitioner can both be a motive for false implication as well as a motive for the petitioner to commit the offence in retaliation of the reprimand being given to him. It, therefore, does not help the petitioner for his prayer for grant of bail.
In view of the above considerations, the petitioner does not deserve any special consideration. The application is rejected.
M. Y. H./3186/L Bail refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer