| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 924 2023 SLD 924 2023 MLD 684 |
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Criminal Bail Application No. S-641 of 2020, decided on 14th December, 2020. Date of hearing: 14th December, 2020.
Before Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J
Abdul Wahab Shaikh for Applicant. Abdul Sattar Mahessar for the Complainant. Shafi Mohammad Mahar, D.P.G. for the State.
Criminal Bail Application No. S-641 of 2020, decided on 14th December, 2020. Date of hearing: 14th December, 2020.
Before Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J
Abdul Wahab Shaikh for Applicant. Abdul Sattar Mahessar for the Complainant. Shafi Mohammad Mahar, D.P.G. for the State.
MUKHTIAR ALI-----Applicant
VERSUS
The STATE-----Respondent
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302,324,337-L,337-H,427,148,149
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 337-L, 337-H, 427, 148, 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, punishment for other hurt, hurt by rash or negligent act, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, rioting, armed with deadly weapon, common object---Bail, refusal of---Vicarious liability---Delayed FIR---Scope---Name of accused appeared in the FIR with specific role as he was complained to have been armed with a Kalashnikov and fired at deceased which hit him on left elbow---Accused had actively participated in the commission of the offence---Principle of vicarious liability was attracted to the case of accused---Complainant had alleged the motive that his brother (deceased) had contracted marriage with sister of accused on which he had issued threats to commit murder---Medical officer had found the injury, attributed to the accused, fatal in nature---Delay had been duly explained in the FIR which was that the complainant had taken the dead body to the police station, postmortem was conducted, funeral rites were conducted and then he had appeared at police station for getting the FIR lodged---Prosecution witnesses in their statements under S. 161, Cr.P.C., had supported the version of FIR---Offence with which the accused had been charged entailed capital punishment, as such, fell within the prohibitory clause of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.---Bail application was dismissed, in circumstances. Munawar v. The State 1981 SCMR 1092; Khan Afsar v. The State and another 2020 PCr.LJ Note 195; Irfanullah v. The State 2019 YLR Note 76 and Hub Ali and another v. The State 2013 PCr.LJ 25 ref. Inayat Ali v. The State 2008 PCr.LJ 1395; Zaka Ullah v. The State and another 2020 SCMR 452; Mohammad Faisal v. The State and another 2020 SCMR 971; Mohammad Umar v. The State and another PLD 2004 SC 477; Rasoolo v. The State 2020 PCr.LJ 166 and Tahir Zeb and others v. The State and another 2020 SCMR 1685 distinguished. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497--- Bail--- Deeper appreciation of evidence---Scope---Deeper appreciation of evidence is neither permissible nor warranted at bail stage but at…
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