Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 2682 2019 SLD 2682 2019 PLJ 1402
Lahore High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 31256-B of 2019, decision & hearing Dated: 20.02.2019
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Ch. Asif Zaman Chatha, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mian Muhammad Awais Mazhar, Deputy Prosecutor General Rai Zameer-ul-Hassan, Advocate

UMAR HAYAT ALIAS UMER DARAZ ALIAS UMERI

VS

STATE, ETC.

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 161,173,497,497(1)(2)

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 148,149,201,302,364

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, Ss. 302, 364, 201, 148 & 149--Bail, refusal of--Abduction--Unseen occurrence--Ulterior motives--Nominated through supplementary statement--Sufficient incriminating material is available to connect with commission of offence--Validity--It is a settled principle of law that while disposing of bail applications Courts are supposed to make tentative assessment of material available on record and deeper appreciation of evidence/material available on record is always deprecated by Superior Courts while adjudicating ancillary matters like bail applications--Petitioner is not entitled to concession of bail at this stage--Bail was dismissed. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE---.--- Through the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for his post-arrest bail in case FIR No.2, dated 02.01.2019, offence under Sections 302, 364, 201, 148, 149, PPC, registered with Police Station, Kaleke Mandi, District Hafizabad. 2. Prosecution story, in brief as per contents of the crime report is that on 29.11.2018 at 7/8:00 p.m. Muhammad Ashgar along with his co-accused abducted brother of the complainant namely Zafar Ullah from his dera and shifted him to Some unknown place. The petitioner has been implicated in this case by the complainant through his supplementary statement. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the crime report; rather he has been implicated in this case through his supplementary statement in connivance with the local police with ulterior motives. It is argued that it is an unseen occurrence. Learned counsel submits that witnesses of last seen have been managed by the prosecution just to strengthen the prosecution version. It is contended that the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. It is argued that the petitioner is behind the bars since the date of his arrest and investigation being complete his corpus is no more required by the police for further investigation and as such no useful purpose would be served by his further…
🔒
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