Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
2001 Y L R 634
2001 Y L R 634
[Karachi]
Before Faiz Muhammad Qureshi, J
HAQ NAWAZ---Applicant
versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No. 163 of 2001, decided on 30th April, 2001.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Ss. 334, 504, 114, 147 & 148---Bail, grant of---Accused was alleged to have caught hold of the injured by arm, but no overt act was attributed to him ---Co-accused had been placed in Column No.2 of the challan-- Accused having, prima facie, made out good case for grant of bail, he was granted bail.
1978 SCMR 357; 1995 SCMR 310; 1994 SCMR 216; 1982 SCMR 955 and PLD 1963 (W.P.) Karachi 118 ref.
Asif Ali A.R. Soomro for Applicant.
Muhammad Iqbal Memon for the State.
ORDER
Present applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 142 of 2000 registered with Police Station Shahdadkot under section 334, Q.D Ordinance, 504, 147, 148, 114, P.P.C who has been sent up to face trial by way of challan, dated 26-1-2001.
Mr. Asif Ali A.R. Soomro learned Counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention on the copy of challan which reveals that four accused namely 1. Eido alias Eid Muhammad, 2. Azeem, 3. Ramzan acid 4. Luqman have been let off by police under section 497, Cr.P.C and they have been placed in Column No.2 whereas the, present applicant has been sent up to face trial along with main accused Khairo. Mr. Soomro further submits that the role assigned to the present applicant is that he caught hold of injured Asadullah by arm and the active role is attributed to accused Khairo who is behind the bars. Mr. Asif Ali Soomro has further submitted that the prosecution is not certain with regard to the majority of the accused in view of the fact that co-accused Eido alias Eid Muhammad, Azeem, Ramzan and Luqman have been let off by police under section 497, Cr.P.C and have been placed in Column No.2 and only statement of Karim Dad has been recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. on 9-1-2001 who has implicated accused Khairo and the present applicant Haq Nawaz Mr. Soomro has further argued that in such cases the superior Courts have granted bail even in murder cases. He has placed reliance in support of his contentions on case-law (1) 1987 SCMR 375 and (2) 1995 SCMR 216 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has granted bail to the accused who is alleged to have held deceased when the principal accused caused injury to deceased. Mr. Soomro has further placed reliance on the law reported in 1982 SCMR 955 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has granted bail to the accused on the ground when the prosecution is not certain with regard to the majority of the accused given in F.I.R and who have been granted bail under section 497, Cr.P.C the co-accused who is attributed injury on leg of deceased has also been granted bail. In the present case, the applicant is alleged to have caught hold of the injured by arm and no overt act has been attributed to the present applicant.
On the other hand, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Memon for A.A.-G. for the State has opposed the grant of bail but after taking into consideration the law reported in 1982 SCMR 955 Mr. Memon has very frankly recorded his no objection to the grant of bail.
I have considered the arguments rendered by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record and impugned order passed by the trial, Court. Admittedly, the present applicant is alleged to have caught hold of the injured Asadullah by arm and no overt act is attributed to the present applicant. In a case reported in PLD 1963 (West Pakistan) Karachi 118 this Court has held that "Even Devil knoweth not the heart. of the man" and it cannot be said at this stage that what was in the mind of present applicant who has only caught hold of the injured by arm and thus his case is . falling within the purview of section 497(2), Cr.P.C, particularly when the co-accused namely Eido, Azeem, Luqman and Ramzan have been placed in Column No.2. of the challan copy, I am of the considered view that the present applicant has, prima facie, made out good case for grant of bail and the law cited by the learned counsel for the applicant is applicable in the present case. Resultantly present applicant is granted bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
H.B.T./H-42/K Bail granted