PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 105
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Ali Zia Bajwa, J.
ASGHAR ALI--Petitioner
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 103-B of 2023, decided on 7.2.2023.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/322/148/149--Cross Version--No specific role/injury--Post Arrest Bail--grant of--The petitioner is named in the cross-version, however, no specific role/injury on the person of the deceased was attributed to him--Specific injury on left thigh of the deceased was attributed to the co-accused, whereas general role of making fire shots, hitting one bullet on left shin of the deceased, was attributed to the remaining accused persons--The petitioner had driven the official vehicle and was not armed with any fire-arm--The investigating officer after deleting offence u/S. 302, PPC added offence under Section 322, PPC--The real/actual facts of the case would be determined by the Trial Court after recording of evidence--The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and no more required to the police--The instant bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail. [Para 4, 5 & 6] A, B, C & D
Khawaja Qaisar Butt, Advocate for Petitioner.
Malik Riaz Ahmad Saghla, Addl. Prosecutor General for State.
Syed Sami Azhar Gardezi, Advocate for Complainant.
Date of hearing 7.2.2023.
Order
Through this petition filed under Section 497, Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks his post-arrest bail in cross-version registered under Sections 322, 302, 148 and 149, PPC in case FIR No. 654/2022, dated 16.09.2022, offences under Sections 302, 324, 353, 186, 427 and 34, PPC read with Sections 13-2(a)/20 of The Punjab Anns Ordinance, 1965 with Police Station Saddar Vehari.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner as per contents of the cross version is that on the intervening night of 15/16.09.2022. he along with his co-accused committed murder of Ali Liaquat son of the complainant.
3. Arguments heard and record perused.
4. Although the petitioner is named in the cross-version however, no specific role/injury on the person of the deceased was attributed to him. As per cross-version, specific injury on left thigh of the deceased was attributed to the co-accused, whereas general role of making fire shots, hitting one bullet on left shin of the deceased, was attributed to the remaining accused persons. The bare perusal of the cross-version reveals that the petitioner was driver of the official vehicle. During the course of investigation, the investigating officer concluded that at the time of alleged occurrence the petitioner had driven the official vehicle and was not armed with any fire-arm. No crime weapon was recovered from the petitioner during the course of investigation. The investigating officer after deleting offence under Section 302, PPC added offence under Section 322, PPC. It is also evident, from the record that the petitioner is eye-witness of main case FIR No. 654/2022, registered under Sections 324, 353, 186, 427 & 34, PPC read with Sections 13-2(a)/20 of The Punjab Arms Ordinance, 1965 against the deceased and his companions. The real/actual facts of the case would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence. All the above narrated facts make the case of the present petitioner one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
5. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and no more required to the police for, the purposes of further investigation. No useful purpose would be served while keeping the accused petitioner behind the bars for indefinite period. If the accused is found guilty during trial, he would be convicted and sentenced accordingly, but if he is acquitted, there would be no compensation for deprivation of his liberty by putting him behind the bars in case of refusal of bail. The guilt of the petitioner as well as evidentiary value of recovered motorcycle on his pointing out would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence.
6. Resultantly, the, instant bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
(M.A.B.) Bail allowed
0 Comments