Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: AZHAR VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Zafar Iqbal ChaudharyZafar Iqbal Chohan
2008 Y L R 1854
2008 Y L R 1854
[Lahore]
Before Zafar Iqbal Chaudhary, J
AZHAR---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Nos.3483-B of 2008, decided on 13th May, 2008.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Allegation against accused was that he fired, but same did not hit anyone---Accused was in judicial lock-up since 30-5-2007, but his trial had not commenced---Police Officer present in the court after consulting the record could not explain whether any empty was recovered from the place of occurrence or not---In absence of any empty from the place of occurrence, the recovery of rifle in the case did not possess any corroborative value because without matching the empty with the rifle, it could not be said with any degree of certainty that the recovered rifle was the one which had been used in the occurrence---Whether the recovered rifle was proper corroborative piece of evidence against accused or not would be seen at the time of trial---All said facts rendered the case against accused to be one of further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.--Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Zafar Iqbal Chohan for Petitioner.
Mian Ismat Ullah, D.P.-G. for the State with Javai Khalid, A.S.-I. with record.
ORDER
ZAFAR IQBAL CHAUDHRY, J.--Through this petition Azhar petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.609 registered at Police Station Bhalwal, District Sargodha on 6-9-2006 for offences under section 302/34, P.P.C.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been involved in this case on account of mala fide of the complainant as well as connivance with the local police. According to the F.I.R. the petitioner has not caused any injury to the deceased or P.W. and the evidence collected by the prosecution during the investigation is also not sufficient to connect the petitioner with the commission of offences alleged against him.
3. On the other hand learned D.P.G. submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and has been ascribed with specific role. According to the F.I.R. he made fire which could not achieve his aim. Though he has not caused any injury to the deceased but keeping in view his act and participation in the occurrence he is not entitled to be released on post-arrest bail by this Court. The offences also fall within the prohibitory clause.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it is noticed that the allegation against the petitioner is that he fired but the same did not hit to anyone. The petitioner is in judicial lock-up since 30-5-2007 but his trial has not commenced so far. Javed Khalid, A.S-I. present in the Court after consulting the record could not explain whether any empty was recovered from the place of occurrence or not. He states that only rifle was recovered from the accused during the investigation of this case. I am afraid that in absence of any empty from the place of occurrence the recovery of rifle in this case does not possess any corroborative value because without matching the empty with the rifle it cannot be said with any degree of certainty that the recovered rifle is the one which has been used in the occurrence. Moreover it would be seen at the time of trial whether the recovered rifle is proper corroborative piece of evidence against the petitioner or not. All these facts render the case against the petitioner to be one of further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
H.B.T./A-35/L Bail granted.