PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Note) 38
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497(2)--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 114, 34, 337-A(i), 337-F(i)--Post-arrest bail, grant of--Further inquiry--Allegation of--Admittedly case of prosecution is that three co-accused caused lathi blows to deceased and allegation against applicant is that he along with four co-accused gave lathi blows to complainant and PW but as per medical certificates complainant sustained one injury on head which is opined as Shajjah-e-Khafifah and PW sustained one injury which is on non-vital part of body--Since there Is general allegation against five accused persons, hence it requires further probe as to which two of them caused injuries to complainant and PW--There is delay of three days in lodging FIR and applicant accused is in jail since 07.02.2016, hence he is no more required for further investigation by police--Question of applicant’s sharing common intention with main accused requires further inquiry--In case-laws relied upon by counsel for applicant, Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has granted bail to accused in cases of similar facts and circumstances--Bail was allowed.
[Para 6] A
Mr. Inam Ali Malik, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Ali Haider Saleem, D.P.G. Sindh for Respondent.
Mr. S. Masood Ahmed Shah for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 11.9.2017.
PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Note) 38
[Sindh High Court, Karachi]
Present: Muhammad Iqbal Mahar, J.
URIS ALI--Applicant
versus
STATE--Respondent
Crl. B. Appln. No. 963 of 2017, decided on 11.9.2017.
Order
Through instant bail application, applicant Uris Ali seeks post arrest bail in Crime No. 14/2016, registered at P.S. Sujawal, for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 114, 34, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), PPC. Earlier his bail application was declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sujawal vide order dated 30.7.2016.
2. Precisely, the prosecution case is that on 01.02.2016 at 1930 hours, applicant/accused, co-accused Azeem, Mukhtiar, Sajan and M. Raheem being armed with Lathis went to the house of complainant and asked Rasool Bux that many times he was forbidden not to pass by the street, but he replied that it is a common street and leading to his house. Co-accused Azeem @ Abban Kehrai instigated others to kill him, whereupon co-accused Mukhtiar, M. Raheem and Sajan caused lathi blows to Rasool Bux on his head and other parts of the body, who fell down on the ground. The complainant raised cries which attracted his sister Mst. Janno. The complainant and Mst. Janno tried to rescue their brother but accused persons caused them lathi blows. On cries, the villagers rushed towards the complainant and rescued them. Thereafter, complainant, shifted the injured to hospital for treatment, but Rasool Bux being serious was referred to LUMHS for further treatment, where he succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter complainant went at police station and lodged the FIR on 04.02.2016 at 22:00 hours.
3. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent and has falsely been involved in this case; that the role of causing lathi injuries to deceased is attributed to co-accused persons, while allegation against applicant is that he along with co-accused caused lathi injuries to complainant Khuda Bux and PW-Mst. Janno but medical evidence is inconsistent with the ocular testimony; as according to FIR five accused persons caused injuries to complainant and Mst. Janno, but as per medical certificates, in all, there are two injuries on the bodies of both injured; that the applicant was arrested on 07.2.2016 and since then he is in jail and is no more required for further investigation, therefore, according to him, the applicant is entitled to grant of bail. In support of his arguments he relied upon the case of Murntaz Hussain and 5 others v. The State (1996 SCMR 1125), Pir Bux v. The State (2012 SCMR 1955) and Qurban Ali v. The State (2017 SCMR 279).
4. As against above, learned DPG assisted by the learned counsel for complainant, opposed the bail application on the ground that the name of applicant appears in FIR with specific role of causing injuries to complainant and PW-Mst. Janno. He further submitted that lathis have been recovered from the possession of accused.
5. Heard arguments and perused the record.
6. Admittedly the case of prosecution is that three co-accused caused lathi blows to deceased and the allegation against the applicant is that he along with four co-accused gave lathi blows to complainant and PW-Mst. Janno, but as per medical certificates complainant sustained one injury on head which is opined as Shajjah-e-Khafifah and Mst. Janno sustained one injury which is on non-vital part of the body. Since there Is general allegation against five accused persons, hence it requires further probe as to which two of them caused the injuries to complainant and PW-Mst. Janno. There is delay of three days in lodging the FIR and the applicant/accused is in jail since 07.02.2016, hence he is no more required for further investigation by the police. In view of above, question of applicant’s sharing common intention with main accused requires further inquiry. In case-laws relied upon by learned counsel for applicant, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has granted bail to accused in cases of similar facts and circumstances.
For what has been discussed above, instant bail application is allowed, applicant/accused is granted bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 300,000/- and PR bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
(A.A.K.) Bail allowed
0 Comments