| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5667 2024 SLD 5667 2024 MLD 1848 |
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Criminal Bail Applications Nos. S-918 of 2023 and S-95 of 2024, decided on 23rd April, 2024
Before Arbab Ali Hakro, J
Atta Hussain Chandio for Applicants. Irshad Hussain Dharejo for the Complainant. Imran Mobeen Khan, Assistant Prosecutor General for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd April, 202
Criminal Bail Applications Nos. S-918 of 2023 and S-95 of 2024, decided on 23rd April, 2024
Before Arbab Ali Hakro, J
Atta Hussain Chandio for Applicants. Irshad Hussain Dharejo for the Complainant. Imran Mobeen Khan, Assistant Prosecutor General for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd April, 202
ANWAR ALI and another---Applicants
VERSUS
The STATE---Respondent
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1898
Section: 498
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b), 34
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Ad-interim pre-arrest bail, recalling of---Accused were charged that they in furtherance of common intention, committed murder of the nephew of the complainant---Record revealed that both the applicants were nominated in the FIR. with the specific role of causing injuries with a cleaver and hatchet on the back of the head of deceased---Prosecution witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., had supported the version of the complainant---Parties were known to each other, therefore, identification of the culprits by the complainant party in the light of a torch could not be doubted at present stage where only tentative assessment of the material was to be made--Prima facie, the factum and place of injuries disclosed by the complainant and witnesses were supported by medical evidence---Number or kind of weapon used for causing such injuries could only be decided at the trial stage---Record showed that prima facie the delay in reporting the matter had been explained by the complainant in that they first took the injured to the hospital where they were busy in his treatment---Complainant party was firstly supposed to save life of injured and not rush for registration of FIR---As far as grant of bail to co-accused was concerned, he was not named in the FIR but was only shown as an unknown culprit who had a pistol in his hand; however, he did not use the same at the time of the incident nor caused any injury to the deceased---Present applicants prima facie caused fatal blows to the deceased; therefore, their case was distinguishable from that of co-accused---Anticipatory bail under Section 498, Cr.P.C., being extraordinary relief, is granted on extraordinary grounds---Pre-arrest bail should not be allowed in routine matters---Applicants, had been nominated in the FIR with a specific and clear role in the commission of the crime and the crime weapon was yet to be recovered---At the stage of bail and before recording evidence in the Trial Court, only tentative assessments are to be made for…
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