Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1113 2020 SLD 1113 2020 PCRLJ 912

Cr. Misc. No. 224 of 2019, decided on 28th September, 2019, hearing Date : 27th September, 2019.
ALI BAIG, JUSTICE
Raja Zia-ur-Rehman for Petitioner. Deputy Advocate General for the State. Basharat Ali for the Complainant.

AFRAZ GUL

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, refusal of---Second bail petition---Record revealed that prior to the present bail petition, accused had filed bail application before the High Court wherein he had agitated the same grounds as the present application except that one prosecution witness had turned hostile while recording his statement in the Trial Court---Trial of the case was in progress and case of the accused was at concluding stage---Comments on the evidentiary value of resiled statement of prosecution witness, were avoided by High Court lest it might prejudice the ultimate findings to be recorded by the Trial Court---Bail was refused, in circumstances. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ALI BAIG, JUSTICE:---.---Through this bail petition, the petitioner namely Afraz Gul son of Juma Noor seeks post arrest bail in a case FIR No.29/2018 dated 29-07-2018 under sections 302/34, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Juglote Gilgit. 2. Briefly allegation against the present petitioner/ accused is that he has abetted/facilitated to principal accused namely Ejaz Gul, who has allegedly committed murder of deceased Shah Farman on 29-07-2018 at Juglote Gilgit. 3. It is pertinent to mention here that earlier the petitioner had filed a bail petition (Cr. Misc. No.193/2018) in this court which was dismissed by this Court on merits vide order dated 22-11-2018. Now, the petitioner/accused has filed this second bail petition having failed to get concession of bail from the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Gilgit. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has not been nominated in the FIR by the complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that the nominated accused namely Mian Gul has been discharged under section 169, Cr.P.C. by the complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that no weapon of offence has been recovered from the petitioner and one PW namely Sharafat has been declared hostile by the learned trial court at the time of recording of his…
🔒
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