Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ASIF VS Respondent: THE STATEHonorable Justice M. Ashraf LeghariMahmood A Qureshi,Fazlur Rehman
2002 Y L R 3682(2)
2002 Y L R 3682(2)
[Karachi]
Before M. Ashraf Leghari, J
MUHAMMAD ASIF‑‑‑Applicant
Versus
THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No.395 and Miscellaneous Application No. 750 of 2002, decided on 12th April, 2002.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.224/225/324/353/427/147/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Record had shown that both the parties opened fire upon each other, but none of them was wounded‑‑‑Empties had not been recovered from the scene of occurrence‑‑ Prior to incident father of accused had written a letter to the Inspector‑General of Police against Police Staff at Police Station concerned which letter had shown that Police had some malice and grudge against the accused and his father‑‑‑Encounter with Police by accused was yet to be established at the time of trial‑‑‑Bail plea of accused was not opposed by State Counsel‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail.
Muhammad v. the State 1998 SCMR 454; 1989 PCr.LJ 1004 and Rab Nawaz v. The State 1990 SCMR 1085 ref.
Mahmood A Qureshi for Applicant.
Fazlur Rehman for the State.
ORDER
The applicant is booked in Crime No.42 of 2002 for the offence under sections 147/148/149/353/324/224/225/427, P.P.C. of Police Station Malir, Karachi.
Briefly stated the facts as disclosed in the F.I.R. by complainant A.S.I. Shoukat Hayat are that on 22‑2‑2002, he alongwith his subordinate staff went to investigate in Crime No.41 of 2002 and where they reached near the scene of offence, the required accused Asif was apprehended at about 1‑15 p.m. The aforesaid accused was boarded in police mobile, upon which one person namely Badar‑ul‑Hassan alias Sheeraz stated that he would also accompany them as accused Asif was his companion. It is stated that when they covered a short distance of about 500 yards, accused Asif at the instigation of Badrul Hassan alias Sheeraz displayed show of force to the police party. It is further stated that some persons belonging to the gang of accused were attracted on the commotion and they opened tire on police party. Subsequently their names were known as Ashraf, Tufail, Raja and other 4/5 persons. In reply to the firing, the police party also fired in their defence. After sometime, the accused succeeded to get the accused Muhammad Asif released from the police custody and all the accused fled from the scene of offence. Front glass of the police mobile was broken. The police on reaching the police station recorded the F.I.R. on behalf of State.
It is contended by the learned counsel that the applicability of section 324, P.P.C. is yet to be determined at the time of trial as no kind of weapon has been mentioned in the F.I.R. from which the culprits opened fire upon police. The empties have nor been recovered from the scene of offence by the police. The contents of F.I.R. revealed that both the parties fired upon each other from close range in crowded area but nobody sustained injury. The accused are in custody since 26‑2‑2002. The prosecution has not produced any independent witness of the area where this incident took place. All the witnesses are police officials. It is submitted that even the Mashirnama of broken glass of the vehicle has not been prepared by the police. Reliance has been placed upon the cases of Muhammad v. The State 1998 SCMR 454, 1989 P.Cr.L.J. 1004 and Rab Nawaz v. the State 1990 SCMR 1085.
Mr. Fazlur Rehman learned counsel appearing for State has conceded to the bail plea of the accused on the ground that no empty has been recovered from the scene of occurrence and that nobody sustained injuries.
The record indicates that both the parties opened fire upon each other but none of them was wounded. The empties have not been recovered from the scene of occurrence. A letter of MIT of this Court has been produced on record which was addressed to I.G. Police stating wherein that Riaz‑ud‑Din father of the present applicant had moved an application against police officials of Police Station Malir, Karachi, prior to the incident. This letter shows that police had some malice and grudge against the present applicant and his father. The encounter with the police by the present applicant is yet to be established at the time of trial. The bail plea of the accused is not opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the State.
The accused is granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
H.B.T./M‑387/K Bail granted.