Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 5553 2025 SLD 5553 = 2025 YLR 1954
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Criminal Bail Application No. S-705 of 2024, decided on 14th November, 2024.
Before Muhammad Saleem Jessar, J
Manzoor Ahmed Mahesar for Applicants. Syed Sardar Ali Shah, Addl. P.G for the State. Khan Muhammad Sangi for the Complainant.

MUNEER AHMED and 2 others---Applicants

VERSUS

The STATE---Respondent

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497(2),498

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 497(2) & 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(i), 337-F(vi), 337-L(2), 147, 148 & 149---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, shajjah-i-mudihah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, munaqqilah, causing hurt, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Pre-arrest bail, confirmation of---Further inquiry---Gist of allegations in FIR transpired that due to property dispute, accused-petitioners assaulted the complainant party, due to which two persons sustained injuries---No doubt the applicants were nominated in the F.I.R with specific role of causing injuries to witnesses---Injuries allegedly sustained by the injured witnesses were either on non-vital part of the body or carried lesser punishment---Injuries attributed to applicant "MA" that he allegedly caused lathi blow to injured on his head and chin were belied by the medical evidence as per medical certificate, the injuries so sustained by him on his chin was available only---Injury attributed to said applicant sustained on the head of injured was missing---None of accused had repeated the injury through which it could be deduced that they had not any intention to commit qatl-i-amd of the witnesses, hence application of S.324 P.P.C was yet to be determined by the trial Court after recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses---In the circumstances, when the parties were already on strained relations over landed property and the land claimed by the complainant party to be their own was in possession of the accused since 2007, therefore, agreement executed by father of the complainant party had not been denied---Mala fide on the part of prosecution could not be ruled out, thus case required further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) to S.497, Cr.P.C--Consequently, bail application was allowed and interim bail already granted to the applicants was confirmed.Ghulam Qadir v. The State 2022 SCMR 750; Attaullah v. The State 2024 PCr.LJ 940; Owaisullah Khan and another v. The State 2012 MLD 586 and Syed Safdar Abbas and others v. The State 2007 YLR 1714 ref.Rana Muhammad Arshad v. Muhammad Rafique and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register