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. 3360/B of 1986, decided on 3rd December, 1986.
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑Principle of consistency‑‑Accused found innocent during investigation and placed in column No. 2 of challan‑‑Principal co‑ accused bailed out by High Court‑‑Case of accused on same footing‑‑Accused allowed bail on principle of consistency by High Court.
Rana Ijaz Ahmad for Petitioner.
Ch. Muhammad Saleem Insaf for the Complainant.
Ch. Abdul Aziz for the State.
Date of hearing: 3rd December, 1986.
Muhammad Khalid alias Shahia petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him and others under section 302/34, P.P.C.
2. The case was registered on 10th April, 1986 at 2‑30 a.m. on the report of Sarfraz complainant wherein he stated that at 12 midnight, he alongwith Farooq and Nazar Hussain alias Naju went out in search of Zulfiqar and on reaching near the Dera of Gagras, heard fire reports. They saw Billu son of Bhola, Shahia and Pappu coming out of the .house of Mst. Razia. They were armed with revolvers. On entering the house of Razia they saw Zulfiqar lying injured in a serious condition.
The motive alleged in the F.I.R. was that Zulfiqar had illicit relations with Mst. Razia while Khalid son of Shafi (not the petitioner) had illicit relations with her elder sister. The accused persons were also the paramours of the aforesaid girls.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been found innocent during the investigation and shown in column No. 2 of the challan, therefore, his case is at par with that of Manzur Hussain alias Pappu who has been released on bail by this Court. He further submits that the principal accused, namely, Khalid alias Billu, has also been released on bail by the Additional Sessions Judge and the case of the petitioner is on a better footing because no overt act has been attributed to him and hehas been found innocent during the investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant and the State concede that the petitioner has been found innocent during the investigation and shown in column No. 2 of the challan. It is also admitted that the principal accused has also been released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge The learned counsel for the complainant, however, submits that two eye- witnesses have supported the prosecution version, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. On the last date of hearing, the learned counsel for the complainant stated that he had learnt that the petitioner had stabbed some one in the jail and he requested for an adjournment to produce proof of the same. On inquiry he states that no case has been registered against the petitioner for any such incident. The case of the petitioner is at par with that of Manzur Hussain alias Pappu who has been admitted to bail by this Court vide order, dated 12th November, 1986 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2881/B of 1986. In view of the principle of consistency, the petitioner is also allowed bail subject to furnishing security in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Lahore City.
S.A./M‑94/L. Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer