Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: UMED ALI VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Muhammad Tasnim Title: UMED ALI vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Bail Application No,499 of 2010 Date of Judgment:2010-08-06 Reported As: 2011 MLD 1091 Result: Bail granted
Judgment ORDER ' MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J.---In this bail application, applicant is booked in Crime No,97 of 2009 registered with P.S.W.J. Shah, under sections 302, 365, 452 & 395, P.P.C. ' Learned counsel for the applicant says that the only allegation against the applicant is that he was present at the scene, but no overt act has been attributed to the applicant. In the circumstances, learned counsel prays that the applicant be admitted to bail and in support of his contention he relies upon a case of Wariyam v. The State (2006 PCr.LJ 1611), wherein in the similar circumstances, learned Single Judge of this Court had admitted the applicant in the reported case on bail as no role whatsoever was assigned to that accused though he was present at the scene of offence. ' Learned D.P.-G. Says that no doubt no overt act has been attributed to the applicant but he along with other co-accused had abducted Muhammad Arab with a view to kill him but there is no material available on record to substantiate the above contention. ' In my view it is a case of further enquiry in terms of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. And following the judgment, quoted above, I admit the applicant to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (two lacs) and execution of personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. ' Bail application stands disposed of accordingly.