Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: RIAZ VS Respondent: THE STATE
2001 P Cr
2001 P Cr. L J 1871
[Lahore]
Before Muhammad Zafar Yasin, J
RIAZ‑‑‑Petitioner
versus
THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.1057/B of 2001/MN, decided on 22nd May, 2001.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/148/149/109‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused was neither named in the F. I. R. nor his presence at the place of occurrence, was substantiated by the contents of the F.I.R.‑‑‑Police diary recorded during investigation showed that the accused had simply instigated the accused party‑‑‑Accused what was arrested subsequently did not participate in the occurrence and no role was attributed to him except the incitement‑‑‑Case against the accused being one of further inquiry, he was admitted to bail.
Mian Fazal Rauf Joiya for Petitioner.
Malik Abdul Hameed Khokhar for the State.
ORDER
Through this bail petition, Riaz accused has sought post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.331 of 2000 registered under sections 302/148/149/109, P.P.C. with Police Station Qabula District Pakpattan Sharif.
According to the F.I.R. lodged on 11‑10‑2000 at about 7‑30 p.m. Shahbaz etc. accused five nominated persons alongwith two unknown persons armed with pistol hockey and Sotas committed the murder of Irshad due to the grievance that he had restrained the accused party from teasing the girls. The petitioner was arrested due to the reasons that Altaf Hussain etc. accused had stated during investigation that they murdered Irshad deceased at the instigation of Riaz petitioner vide Diary No.6, dated 24‑10‑2000.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. nor the P.Ws. have implicated him in their statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C.; further argued that no incriminating material has been brought on the police file to involve him in the charge of murder.
The State Counsel has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner but could not point out any material collected by the police to connect the petitioner.
Heard.
The petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. nor his presence at the place of occurrence, is substantiated by the contents of th6 F.I.R. Only Diary No.6 recorded on 24‑10‑2000 by the police during investigation indicates that Riaz, petitioner, instigated the accused party to avenge the insult of Shahbaz at the hands of Irshad Kharal from the complainant party, whereupon, the occurrence took place. The petitioner has been arrested subsequently on the allegation that he exhorted the accused party. Admittedly, the petitioner did not participate in the occurrence and no role is attributed to him except the incitement. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry.
In the circumstances, the petitioner is admittedly to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs. one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
H. B. T./R‑62/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.