Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 1284 2018 SLD 1284 2018 MLD 934
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 94159-B of 2017, decided on 21-12-2017.
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, JUSTICE
Pir S.A. Rashid for Petitioner. Ms. Tahira Parveen, D.P.P. for the State and M. Akhtar, S.I. with record. Rana Asif Imran for the Complainant.

MOHSIN ALI

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Accused was not named in FIR---Complainant and prosecution witnesses, while identifying accused during identification parade, assigned joint role of giving beating to the deceased, but postmortem report of the deceased reflected that except the fracture of hyoid bone, there was no mark of violence on the body of deceased---Co-accused who had been assigned the role of pressing neck of the deceased, had already been declared innocent; which had prima facie created doubt qua the story of incident---Accused, after arrest was kept in Police Station for one day and thereafter was lodged in jail for the purpose of identification parade---Complainant and prosecution witnesses also did not assign any specific role to accused in the occurrence during the proceedings of identification parade---Evidentiary value of identification parade against accused, would be determined by Trial Court after recording evidence---Case had become of two versions i.e. one put forwarded by the complainant in FIR and the other coming on record during investigation; question as to which version was correct, would be determined by the Trial Court after recording evidence---Questions of sharing common intention and vicarious liability of accused in commission of alleged offence, would be determined by Trial Court after recording evidence---Accused was previous non-convict and never involved in any other case of such nature---Accused was behind the bars since 26-7-2017, but his trial had not progressed---Investigation to the extent of accused was complete and he was no more required for further investigation---No useful purpose would be served by keeping accused behind the bars---Case of accused having become one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C., he was granted bail, in circumstances. Zaigham Ashraf v. State and others 2016 SCMR 18 rel. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Bail---Benefit of doubt---Benefit of doubt, could be given to accused, even at bail stage. THIS ORDER PASSED…
🔒
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