| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 1819 2023 MLD 1528 2023 SLD 1819 |
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Transit Bail Application No. 233 of 2023, decided on 12th May, 2023.Date of hearing: 11th May, 2023.
Before Rozi Khan Barrech, J
Aqil Khan Badini for Applicant. Wajahat Khan Ghaznavi, State Counsel for Prosecutor General for the State.
Criminal Transit Bail Application No. 233 of 2023, decided on 12th May, 2023.Date of hearing: 11th May, 2023.
Before Rozi Khan Barrech, J
Aqil Khan Badini for Applicant. Wajahat Khan Ghaznavi, State Counsel for Prosecutor General for the State.
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE---Applicant
VERSUS
The STATE---Respondent
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302,324
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code ( XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 324---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to qatl-i-amd---Bail, grant of---Mere presence of accused at the place of occurrence---Record revealed that though the petitioner/ accused was nominated in the FIR, however, role of firing upon the deceased was not attributed to him but to another accused---First Information Report was also silent about the fact whether at the relevant time the petitioner/accused was present at the spot in armed condition or he was empty-handed---Mere presence of an accused at the time of commission of a crime was not enough to hold him responsible for commission of a crime unless the prosecution had succeeded in establishing that the petitioner/accused had also shared common intention or common object with the co-accomplice(co-accused) or had helped/facilitated him (co-accused)---Petitioner/accused, being empty-handed , could lend no help to his co-accused , rather he might have put himself in danger of being harmed by the other side had there been any retaliation or counter-attack by them---Whenever no overt act was ascribed to the accused, a lenient view was required to be taken towards the accused for granting him the concession of bail---Co-accused did not disclose that the accused was with him at the time of occurrence---Even the crime weapon had been recovered on the pointation of co-accused---Thus, no evidence, admittedly, was on record that the petitioner/accused had made firing upon the deceased---Trial Court would answer the question whether mere presence of the petitioner/accused at the place of occurrence could result into his conviction or not---Bail should not be ordinarily granted to an accused in a murder case where the trial had commenced, when there was a possibility of prejudicing the merit of the case, or there was a likelihood of abscondence of the accused---Holding of trial, at whatever stage, does not create bar in granting bail if the accused was otherwise found entitled---Case of the accused required further inquiry---Bail was allowed, in circumstances. ORDER ROZI KHAN BARRECH, J.---Through instant application, the applicant/accused Muhammad…
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