Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 1756 2007 SLD 1756 2007 PLJ 100

Crl. Misc. No. 1997/B of 2006, decision dated: 26.7.2006, hearing DATE : 26.7.2006.
MUHAMMAD, JAHANGIR ARSHAD, J.
Mr. Muhammad Rehman Khokhar & Mr. Saghir Ahmad Bhatti, Advocates for Complainant. Rao Atif Nawaz, Advocate for State.

LAHORE HIGH COURT, Multan Bench Multan AMJAD HUSSAIN and anothers

VS

STATE AMJAD HUSSAIN and anothers vs STATE

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 498,497

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 324

(i) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)------S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860) S. 324--Japha--Vicarious liability--Bail, granted--Prayer for--Accused was empty handed at the time of occurrence and allegation against him was one of keeping the complainant in JAPHA causing no injury, therefore, his vicarious liability within the meanings of S. 324 PPC could not be determined at same stage, hence his case was covered by proviso to S. 498 Cr.P.C. being of further inquiry--Pre-arrest bail was confirmed. (ii) Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)-- ----S. 324--Criminal Procedure Code, (V of 1898) S. 498--Bail before arrest was refused--Prayer for--Distinguishable--Malafide--Co-accused was distinguishable to be equipped with fire-arm and caused injury on the leg of complainant supported by medical evidence, hence his involvement in case for time being could not be considered as one tainted with malafide--Co-accused was not entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail. Order The petitioners who are accused in case FIR No. 114 dated 27.4.2006 under Section 324/452 PPC P.S. Sadar Burewala, seek pre-arrest bail in the said case. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the fire arm injury caused to Muhammad Ashraf complainant is attributed to Ijaz petitioner, whereas, Amjad petitioner was empty handed and the only allegation against him is of holding the complainant in Japha. Further submits that the injury attributed to Ijaz is self inflicted and although the Medical Board was constituted to verify the opinion of the Medical Officer but neither the Medical Officer nor the Medical Board recorded any expressed findings to this effect and the Medical Board only agreed with the opinion of the Medical Officer, hence the case of Ijaz petitioner is one of further inquiry. Lastly, it is argued that parties are cousins inter-se and civil litigation in respect of some property is also going on between the parties. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant assisted by state counsel has opposed this petition by contending that both the petitioners who are brothers, launched attack on the complainant with common intention and…
πŸ”’
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