Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497----Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302---Bail, refusal of---Dispute, in the ..present case was whether the accused was involved in offence under S. 302, P. P. C. and not that accused had committed offence covered under S. 324, P. P. C. which fell within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr. P. C.---Cause of delay was also attributed to accused party by the Trial Court---Bail application of accused was dismissed in circumstances.
Mian Mumtaz Ahmed Watoo for Petitioner.
Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Complainant.
Ijaz Ahmad Bajwa for the State.
Majeed A.S.-I.
AMEER HAMZA VS State2007 Y L R 2883[Lahore]Before Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, JAMEER HAMZA---PetitionerVersusTHE STATE---RespondentCriminal Miscellaneous No.4866/A/B of 2006, decided on 18/10/2006.
ORDER
SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.--- The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in F.I.R No.190/04, .dated 21-5-2004, under sections 302, 324, 148 and 149 PPC. The said F.I.R. was registered at P.S. Qaboola Sharif, District Pakpattan.
2. Briefly according to the F.I.R. co-accused Sajid Iqbal fired a shot with 12-bore gun which hit Muhammad Sarwar son of the complainant in his chest, who died at the spot. After hearing the firing, Qasim Ali another son of the complainant came out, who was fired upon by the petitioner with his .12-bore gun. Qasim Ali son of the complainant .was hit on right ribs, arms and other parts of his body.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the investigation, the petitioner was placed in column No.2 and one Anwar was found guilty. In the second investigation, DSP also concluded that Anwar had killed the deceased instead of petitioner. It was also concluded during the investigation that the petitioner had fired in his self-defence. Another investigation followed, by which, it was concluded that the petitioner had committed an offence covered under section 324 PPC instead of 302, P.P.C.
4. According to the learned counsel for the complainant, the petitioner was arrested on 28-6-2005 and in all investigations he was found guilty in offence under section. 324 PPC and he also remained absconder for one year. The learned counsel submitted that order-sheet of the trial court indicates that the accused party is causing delay in the conclusion of the trial.
5. I have heard that learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
6. Though there is dispute whether the petitioner is involved in offence under section 302 PPC or not, however, there is no dispute that he committed offence covered by section 324, P.P.C. which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The cause of the delay is also attributed to the accused party by the learned trial court. Therefore, for the above reasons, this bail application is dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to make effort to complete the trial within next two months.
H.B.T./A-70/LBail refused.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497----Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302---Bail, refusal of---Dispute, in the ..present case was whether the accused was involved in offence under S. 302, P. P. C. and not that accused had committed offence covered under S. 324, P. P. C. which fell within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr. P. C.---Cause of delay was also attributed to accused party by the Trial Court---Bail application of accused was dismissed in circumstances.
Mian Mumtaz Ahmed Watoo for Petitioner.
Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Complainant.
Ijaz Ahmad Bajwa for the State.
Majeed A.S.-I.
ORDER
SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.--- The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in F.I.R No.190/04, .dated 21-5-2004, under sections 302, 324, 148 and 149 PPC. The said F.I.R. was registered at P.S. Qaboola Sharif, District Pakpattan.
2. Briefly according to the F.I.R. co-accused Sajid Iqbal fired a shot with 12-bore gun which hit Muhammad Sarwar son of the complainant in his chest, who died at the spot. After hearing the firing, Qasim Ali another son of the complainant came out, who was fired upon by the petitioner with his .12-bore gun. Qasim Ali son of the complainant .was hit on right ribs, arms and other parts of his body.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the investigation, the petitioner was placed in column No.2 and one Anwar was found guilty. In the second investigation, DSP also concluded that Anwar had killed the deceased instead of petitioner. It was also concluded during the investigation that the petitioner had fired in his self-defence. Another investigation followed, by which, it was concluded that the petitioner had committed an offence covered under section 324 PPC instead of 302, P.P.C.
4. According to the learned counsel for the complainant, the petitioner was arrested on 28-6-2005 and in all investigations he was found guilty in offence under section. 324 PPC and he also remained absconder for one year. The learned counsel submitted that order-sheet of the trial court indicates that the accused party is causing delay in the conclusion of the trial.
5. I have heard that learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
6. Though there is dispute whether the petitioner is involved in offence under section 302 PPC or not, however, there is no dispute that he committed offence covered by section 324, P.P.C. which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The cause of the delay is also attributed to the accused party by the learned trial court. Therefore, for the above reasons, this bail application is dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to make effort to complete the trial within next two months.
H.B.T./A-70/LBail refused.
0 Comments