| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 368 2026 SLD 368 = 2026 MLD 97 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 49296-B of 2025, decided on 30th September, 2025.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Jawad Zafar, J
Barrister Danyal Ijaz Chadhar for Petitioner. Fakhar Abbas, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State with Naveed S.I.
Crl. Misc. No. 49296-B of 2025, decided on 30th September, 2025.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Jawad Zafar, J
Barrister Danyal Ijaz Chadhar for Petitioner. Fakhar Abbas, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State with Naveed S.I.
JUNAID---Petitioner
VERSUS
The STATE and others---Respondents
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497(2),497
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302,324,452,436,109,148,149
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 452, 436, 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint, mischief by fire or explosive substance with the intent to destroy a building, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Petitioner was nominated in the FIR with specific role of causing firearm injury below the right chest of deceased---During the course of investigation, the petitioner claimed a specific plea that he only tried to rescue the children and had not participated in the occurrence---Said version of the petitioner was also verified by the Investigating Officer in its findings incorporated in daily case diary, leading to the conclusion that the petitioner did not participate in the crime, therefore, the petitioner's case became one requiring further inquiry into his alleged guilt--Furthermore, considering the outcome of the investigations, the petitioner's case presented two conflicting versions; one stated by the complainant in the FIR and the other revealed by the Investigating Officer---Which version was correct was a matter to be determined by the Trial Court after recording the evidence---Apart from the above, the crime empties which were secured from the crime scene were found shot from one crime weapon which did not belong to the petitioner--Principal perpetrator of the crime committed suicide at the crime scene--Nothing was recovered upon the disclosure of the petitioner---Investigation had been completed and the petitioner was no more required for the purpose of any further investigation---Petitioner was arrested on 18.05.2025 and had been in custody since, without significant progress in the trial---In such state of affairs, the case of the petitioner fell within the ambit of subsection (2) of S.497 of Cr.P.C. calling for further inquiry into his guilt---Petitioner was behind the bars and was no more required for further investigation---Bail petition was allowed, in circumstances. Ehsan Ullah v. The State 2012 SCMR…