| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 1123 2011 SLD 1123 2011 YLR 1028 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Appeal No. 537 of 2010, decision & hearing Dated: 14-01-2011.
ATTAULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Sh. Iftikhar-ul-Haq
Respondent(s) by: Sanaullah Shamim, D.A.G.
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Appeal No. 537 of 2010, decision & hearing Dated: 14-01-2011.
ATTAULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Sh. Iftikhar-ul-Haq
Respondent(s) by: Sanaullah Shamim, D.A.G.
NASREEN BIBI
VS
THE STATE AND ANOTHER
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 164,497
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 120B,302
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 120-B---Qatl-e-amd, criminal conspiracy---flail, grant of --Accused (woman) was nominated in the statement of deceased's brother under S.164, Cr.P.C. which was recorded after delay of seven clays---Said brother of deceased remained silent despite /laving knowledge of the alleged illicit relations of the accused with her paramour---Accused did not make confession---Being a female and having a suckling baby in her lap, prima facie, her case fell within the ambit of further inquiry entitling her to the concession of bail---Complainant having not disclosed any source of his knowledge of the alleged offence, the charge still remained a presumption without solid reason---No ocular evidence was available on record---No incriminating material had been recovered from the accused---Bail was granted. Mst. Nusrat v. State 1996 SCMR 973 fol. 1997 MLD 1866 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ATTAULLAH KHAN, J.--- Mst. Nasreen Bibi, wife of Younas Khan, seeks bail in case F.I.R. No.783 dated 2-12-2010 of Police Station Tank under sections 302/120-B, P.P.C. 2. Initially, the accused/petitioner lodged the F.I.R. for the murder of her husband against some unknown persons but upon the statement of Misal Khan, brother of the deceased recorded on 9-12-2010 under section 164, Cr.P.C, she has been made an accused in the case because of having illicit relations with Akhtar Zaman. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the charge against the petitioner is belated, that there is no direct evidence against her, that there is no recovery of any incriminating material and that the petitioner has not confessed her guilt in the crime. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant and State argued that the offence falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C:, that with her active connivance, the murder of the deceased has taken place; that she has suppressed the material facts and that she is directly charged for the offence by the brother of the deceased in his statement. 5. I have carefully gone through the record and considered the arguments of the learned counsel…
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