Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLG 1294 2001 SLD 1294 2001 PCRLJ 2016
Sindh High Court
Criminal Bail Application No.293 of 2001, decided on 7th June, 2001.
MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, J
Sahib Khan Kanasiro for Applicants. Sher Muhammad Shar, A.A. G. for the State.

AYAZ ALI and others --Applicants

VS

THE STATE --Respondents

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302/460/34

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 9,24

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)     S. 497 Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/460/34 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.9 24 Bail Provisions contained in S.460, P.P.C. mere in consonance with ‘Maqasid ul Shariah’, out of which two were attracted in the case in which the fundamental right of the sanctity of the louse, protection of the property and protection of life had been violated ¬Every accused jointly concerned with committing lurking house trespass by light or house breaking by night was liable by way of vicarious liability for punishment with imprisonment for life or even for committing murder, although each and every person committing lurking house trespass by night )r house breaking by night had not participated in commission of murder or curt committed by co accused Bail was declined to accused in circumstances.   Rajib v. The State 2001 PCr.LJ 701 ref.   Sahib Khan Kanasiro for Applicants.   Sher Muhammad Shar, A.A. G. for the State. ORDER All the five applicants have been sent up to face trial for the offence punishable under sections 302, 460 read with section 34, P.P.C. The sole contention of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants is that no specific role has been assigned to the five applicants for causing any hurt to the deceased and, therefore, they are entitled to be released on bail. He has placed reliance in this behalf on a D.B. decision of this Court in the case of Rajib v. The State 2001 PCr.LJ 701. In this case bail was granted to the accused persons who were armed at the time of incident and were alleged to have made ineffective firing. Enmity already existed between the parties and, therefore, it was held that it was case of further enquiry into the guilt of accused persons. In the said circumstances they were granted bail. The learned A.A. G. has opposed the bail application for the reason that the facts of the cited case are distinguishable as in the present case the accused persons are said to have committed house breaking by night as all of them were found inside the cattle pen of the complainant party as stated in the F.I.R. and as such the provisions contained in section 460,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492