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.81‑B of 1987, decided on 9th February, 1987.
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302‑‑Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Ground of statutory delay‑‑Desperate and dangerous criminal‑‑Murder committed during course of Haraabah‑‑Accused correctly identified by eye‑witnesses during identification parade‑‑Nature of offence and manner in which offence committed, held, clearly suggested, accused to be desperate and dangerous criminal‑‑Bail declined in circumstances.
Muhammad Awais Shahid for Petitioner.
Sardar Mohabat Ali Dogar for the Complainant.
M. Naeem for the State.
Muhammad Khan petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case under section 302 P.P.C. and Article 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. In an occurrence which took place on 19th October, 1984 at 11 p.m. Qutab‑ud‑Din deceased was murdered during the course of Haraabah committed in the house of Muhammad Hayat complainant. The culprits are not named in the F.I.R. but their description has been mentioned therein. It is admitted that in an identification parade the petitioner teas correctly identified by four eye‑witnesses.
3. The petitioner moved an application for bail in the Sessions Court on the ground that his trial has not concluded within a period of two years after his arrest but the prayer was declined on the ground that he is involved in a heinous offence and the trial has already commenced.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since the petitioner is in jail for a continuous period of more than two years, he is entitled to the concession of bail irrespective of the fact that the trial has commenced. Learned counsel for the complainant and the State have opposed the prayer for bail.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties. It is admitted that the petitioner was correctly identified by four eye‑witnesses. The very nature of the offence and the manner in which it was committed clearly suggest that the offenders were desperate and dangerous criminals who committed murder during the course of Haraabah. I am, therefore, not inclined to admit the petitioner to bail. The petition is dismissed.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant states that prosecution witnesses have already been examined. The learned Additional Sessions Judge is directed to dispose of the case expeditiously.
S. A. /M‑39/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