Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 1286 2003 SLD 1286 2003 PCRLJ 1909
Sindh High Court
Criminal Bail Application No. 1578 of 2001, decided on 24th April; 2002.
GHULAM RABBANI, J
Makhdoam Mujtaba Shah for Petitioners. KaziWali Muhammad for the State. Shoukat H. Zubedi: Amicus curiae.

Mst. ZUHRA BIBI and another--Applicants

VS

THE STATE

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302/364/364-A/34

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---   ---S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/364/364-A/34---Bail, grant of---F.I.R. had been lodged after an. unexplained delay of about 12 hours though distance between the lace of incident and Police Station was only one hundred yards---Name of the co-accused did not find place in F. I. R. ---Complainant was not an eye-witness of abduction or murder--¬Three eye-witnesses on whose information complainant had lodged the F. I. R., in their statements under S.161, Cr.P.C., had assigned no role to the two accused ladies about the occurrence of the incident---No recovery of any incriminating article had been made from the possession of accused or on their pointation---Accused had not made judicial or extra¬-judicial confession---One of the accused lady had a suckling child and other was an old one and they both were in jail for the last one and a half years---State Counsel who did not controvert facts of the case; did not object to the grant of bail to the accused and had submitted that no specific allegation could be leveled against both accused ladies about the abduction or killing of the deceased---Accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances.   Makhdoam Mujtaba Shah for Petitioners.   KaziWali Muhammad for the State.   Shoukat H. Zubedi: Amicus curiae.   Date of hearing: 18th March, 2002. Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---   ---S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/364/364-A/34---Bail, grant of---F.I.R. had been lodged after an. unexplained delay of about 12 hours though distance between the lace of incident and Police Station was only one hundred yards---Name of the co-accused did not find place in F. I. R. ---Complainant was not an eye-witness of abduction or murder--¬Three eye-witnesses on whose information complainant had lodged the F. I. R., in their statements under S.161, Cr.P.C., had assigned no role to the two accused ladies about the occurrence of the incident---No recovery of any incriminating article had been made from the possession of accused or on their pointation---Accused had not made judicial or extra¬-judicial confession---One of the accused lady had a suckling…
🔒
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