Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD SALEEM VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Asif Saeed Khan KhosaM.A. Zafar,Miss Samina Shahzadi
2007 Y L R 1030
2007 Y L R 1030
[Lahore]
Before Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J
MUHAMMAD SALEEM---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE-Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.8768-B of 2006, decided on 14th November, 2006.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Occurrence in the case had taken place during night and even according to F.I.R. itself accused, was empty handed at that time---Accused had not caused any injury to any person during alleged occurrence and only role attributed to him in the F.I.R. was that of catching hold of deceased and facilitating his co-accused to fire at deceased which allegation prima facie appeared to be unbelievable--Investigation of the case had already been finalized and report under S.173, Cr.P.C. had been submitted according to which investigating agency had found that accused was not present at the scene of the crime at. relevant time and that he had arrived at the spot after the main incident was already over---Accused was languishing in judicial lock-up and his continued custody in jail was not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at that stage---Case against accused calling for further inquiry into his guilt within purview of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C., he was admitted to bail.
M.A. Zafar for Petitioner.
Miss Samina Shahzadi for the State with Rana Sana Ullah, S.-I., with Record.
ORDER
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Through this petition Muhammad Saleem petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.795 registered at Police Station, Ghulam Muhammad Abad, District Faisalabad on 14-8-2006 in respect of an offence under section 302, P.P.C. read with sections 34, P.P.C.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed by me that the occurrence in this case had taken place during a night and even according to the F.I.R. itself the petitioner was empty-handed during the same. Admittedly the petitioner had not caused any injury to any person during the alleged occurrence and the only role attributed to the petitioner in the F.I.R. is that of catching hold of the deceased and facilitating his co-accused namely Shafqat to fire at the deceased which allegation prima facie, appears to be unbelievable. The investigation of this case has already been finalized and a perusal of the report submitted under section 173, Cr.P.C. shows that the investigating agency had found that the petitioner was not present at the scene of the crime at the relevant time and he had arrived at the spot after the main incident was already over. The petitioner is languishing in judicial lock-up and, thus, his continued custody in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
H.B.T./M-699/L Bail granted.