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.
1987 P Cr. L J 1227
[Lahore]
Before Kamal Mustafa Bokhari, J
SAID SHAH and 2 others‑‑Petitioners
versus
THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 986/B of 1984, decided on 19th September, 1984.
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/307/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑ Lalkara attributed to one of petitioners while other petitioners allegedly facilitated murder by co‑accused who gave a solitary knife blow to deceased, resulting in his death‑‑Question whether petitioners were innocent or guilty of offence charged with was yet to be determined by Trial Court and for the present the case against them was one of further inquiry‑‑Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances.
Sahibzada Farooq Ali Khan with Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioners.
Tassadaq Hussain Jilani, Asstt. A.‑G. for the State.
Said Shah, Murtaza Shah and Zakir Shah petitioners alongwith Alam Sher are accused of offence under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. Said Shah petitioner is alleged to have raised Lalkara while Murtaza Shah and Zakir Shah facilitated the murder of Muhammad Amir by their co‑accused Alam Sher who delivered one knife blow to the deceased.
2. Learned Assistant Advocate‑General has stated that the investigation is now being made by a A.S.P. who has yet to arrive at some conclusion. According to the learned Assistant Advocate‑General this is a case of vicarious liability. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although in three earlier investigations petitioners were found to be innocent he will not urge the bail on that ground and submits that none of the petitioners is alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased due to which case against them is of further inquiry.
3. The proverbial Lalkara is attributed to Said Shah while the remaining two petitioners allegedly facilitated the murder. From material on record Alam Sher gave a solitary knife blow resulting in the death of Muhammad Amir. It will be for the trial Court to determine the guilt or innocence of the petitioners. As at present case against petitioners is of further inquiry covered by section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Therefore, petitioners are allowed bail subject to their furnishing security in the sum of Rs.25,000 (Rupees twenty‑five thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Sahiwal.
S.G.D./S‑20/L Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer