Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 1600 2010 SLD 1600 2010 YLR 714
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Petition No. 396 of 2009, decision & hearing Dated: 15-12-2009.
ATTAULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Saadullah Khan
Respondent(s) by: Fazlur Rehman Khan Baloch

ZAINUDDIN

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,302,324

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34---Qatl-i-amd---Bail, refusal of---Accused was directly charged by the complainant who succumbed to injuries after two days; in a way, his report could be considered as dying declaration---Medical report also supported involvement of accused---Site plan had corroborated the evidence collected by the prosecution---Existence of cross case or difference in number of injuries and number of accused would not make accused entitled to bail---Case of accused being not fit for bail, bail petition was dismissed. 1999 PCr.LJ 810; Laiq Shah and another v. The State and others 2006 PCr.LJ 184; Safirulah v. The State and another 2003 PCr.LJ 1691; Zarghun Shah v. The State and another 2004 PCr.LJ 127 and Sardar Munir Ahmad Dogar v. The State PLD 2004 SC 822 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ATTAULLAH KHAN, J.- Accused-petitioner Ziainuddin son of Sheik Saadi seeks bail in case F.I.R. No.635 dated 15-10-2009 registered under sections 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station City, Bannu. Earlier his bail petition was dismissed by the learned Courts below. 2. The brief facts are that Shahqiaz Khan reported in the Emergency Ward, Civil Hospital, Bannu that on the day of occurrence he was coming from Lakki Gate, Bannu towards his shop situated in Bazar Ahmad Khan Chauk and when reached to the spot near the shop of Pehlwan, Snuff seller, at about 1530 hours, Zainuddin armed with .30 bore pistol and Faridoon and Zulqarnain duly armed with Kalashnikovs appeared and opened firing with which the complainant was hit. The accused decamped from the spot. Later on the complainant succumbed to the injuries on 17-10-2009 i.e. on the second day of the occurrence. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that cross case has also been registered vide F.I.R. No.636 on the same date and time under sections 324/34, P.P.C. and in the presence of the cross case, at this stage, it cannot be ascertained as to which of the parties is aggressor and on this ground the accused-petitioner is entitled to bail. He further argued that three persons are charged and the number of injuries do not tally with the number of accused…
🔒
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