| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 415 2021 SLD 415 2021 MLD 392 |
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Bail Application No. 72 of 2020, decided on 16-03-2020, Date of hearing: 12-03-2020.
ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE
Karam Khan Bazai for Applicant. Muhammad Usman Yousafzai and Matiullah Kakar for the Complainant.
Criminal Bail Application No. 72 of 2020, decided on 16-03-2020, Date of hearing: 12-03-2020.
ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE
Karam Khan Bazai for Applicant. Muhammad Usman Yousafzai and Matiullah Kakar for the Complainant.
SULEMAN SHAH
VS
THE STATE
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302,34,149
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 34---Qatl-i-amd and common intention---Bail, grant of---Absconsion---Scope---Prosecution case was that the accused was present along with two co-accused persons, who fired and killed two persons---Accused was nominated in the FIR but no role of firing was attributed to him---FIR was also silent as to whether the accused was armed or not---Witnesses, in their statements under S.161, Cr.P.C., had although alleged that the accused was equipped with fire arm and had murdered the deceased persons but such role was not ascribed to the accused in the FIR---Bail could be granted if the accused had a good prima facie case for bail on merits and his absconsion would not come in the way while granting bail---Petition for grant of bail was allowed, in circumstances. Mitho Pitafi v. The State 2009 SCMR 299 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 34 149---Common intention---Common object---Scope---Mere presence of an accused at the time of commission of crime is not enough to hold him responsible for commission of crime, unless the prosecution succeeds in establishing that the accused had also shared common intention or common object with his co-accomplices or helped or facilitated them in the crime. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 34---Bail---Qatl-i-amd and common intention---No overt act ascribed to accused---Scope---Whenever no overt act was ascribed to accused, lenient view was required to be taken towards the accused for granting him the concession of bail. Muhammad Khan alias Muhammad Bux v. The State 2015 PCr.LJ 69 and Muhammad Tanveer v. The State 2014 PCr.LJ 1096 ref. JUDGMENT ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE:---.--- This order disposes of Criminal Bail Application No.72/2020 filed on behalf of applicant (accused) Suleman Shah son of Khan Muhammad, for grant of bail after arrest in FIR No.149 of 2011 dated 26th August 2011, at Levies Thana Chaman, under Sections 302 and 34, P.P.C. 2. Facts of the case are that on 26th August 2011, the complainant Essa Muhammad son of Gul Muhammad lodged above FIR, with the averments that onβ¦
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