Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 2430 2012 SLD 2430 2012 YLR 1742
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Petition No. 305 of 2011, decided on 15th August, 2011
KHALID MEHMOOD, J
Sanaullah Khan Gandapur for Petitioners. D.A.G. for the State. Muhammad Waheed Anjum for the Complainant

HAKIM KHAN and anothers

VS

THE STATE and another

Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34---Qatl-e-amd---Bail, refusal of---Court, at bail stage had to see the F.I.R., site plan, postmortem report and other evidence collected by the Investigating Officer and could not go into deep merits of the case which was the job at the trial---Accused were directly charged in the murder of deceased by natural witness who was widow of the deceased having three minor sons; maximum age of eldest son was five years---Accused was charged for the murder of his own real brother prior to the present occurrence---No doubt the report had been lodged at the spot, but the reason had been given by the complainant to be, that she being a womanfolk remained present on the spot---Such point could be resisted at the stage of trial and not at bail stage---All said points in presence of the previous enmity over the land in dispute, did not warrant the concession of bail to be accepted---Bail petition, was dismissed, in circumstances. 1967 PLD Pesh. 269; 1982 PCr.LJ 295 and 338; 2009 PCr.LJ 206; PLD 2009 Pesh 28; 2003 PCr.LJ 149; 2009 PCr.LJ 110; 1998 SCMR 596 and 2010 PCr.LJ 386 ref. JUDGMENT KHALID MEHMOOD, J.---Petitioners, namely, Hakim Khan and Ajmal Khan alias Ajamli, having failed to secure their release on bail in the lower Courts, have approached this Court for seeking the same relief. 2. Short facts of the instant case are that the accused/petitioners were charged in case F.I.R. No.129 dated 11-6-2011 registered under section 302/34, P.P.C. police station, Shaheed Nawab Khan Penyala DI Khan. In the F.I.R. the accused/petitioners along with two other co-accused were charged by the complainant for murder of her husband. 3. Learned counsel for the accused/petitioners contended that the report was lodged after delay of 3:45 hours in the shape of murasila. He further submitted that the report had lodged at the spot and that too delay of 3:45 hours which clearly suggests that the same was lodged after due consultation and deliberation and the same is based on mala fide on the part of prosecution. He further argued that the present of complainant on the spot as per custom of the area is…
🔒
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