Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: ABDUL REHMAN VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Sh. Azmat SaeedAltaf Ibrahim Qureshi
2008 Y L R 1781
2008 Y L R 1781
[Lahore]
Before Sh. Azmat Saeed, J
ABDUL REHMAN---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.1636-B of 2007, decided on 26th September, 2007.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Co-accused having already been granted bail, accused could also be granted bail following the rule of consistency---No reference of any sharp-edged injury alleged to have been inflicted by accused in the F.I.R. was found though mentioned in the medico-legal report---Cause of death of deceased was also not ascertainable---Case against accused being of further inquiry, he was released on bail.
Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for the Petitioner.
Sh. Imtiaz Ahmed for the State.
ORDER
SH. AZMAT SAEED, J.--Criminal Miscellaneous 1636-B of 2007 filed on behalf of the petitioner Abdul Rehman seeking post arrest bail arises from case F.I.R. No.120, dated 12-5-2006 registered with Police Station Muzafar Abad District Multan for offences under sections 302/34, P.P.C.
2. The precise allegation as embodied in the F.I.R. is that, petitioner and the co-accused Ashiq Hussain gave beating to deceased. The co-accused was allegedly sitting on the chest of the deceased while the petitioner held his arms. Complainant and the P.Ws. intervened and rescued the victim who subsequently died.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that prosecution version does not find support from the medical as well as Chemical Examiner's report. Adds that petitioner did not use any weapon and there is no specific attribution to him and no previous enmity exists between the petitioner and deceased motivating the petitioner to do away with the deceased. Adds that police during the investigation concluded that no offence under section 302, P.P.C. was made out and in fact section 322, P.P.C. was attracted. which does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause to section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the State controverts the assertion and opposes the grant of bail on the ground that petitioner is involved in a heinous offence.
5. Admittedly, the co-accused of the petitioner namely Ashiq Hussain has already been granted bail by this Court vide order, dated 6-2-2007 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.3634-B of 2006. There is no reference of any sharp edged injury alleged to have been inflicted by the petitioner in the F.I.R. though mentioned in the MLR. Cause of death is also not ascertainable. The aforesaid brings the case of the petitioner within the four corners of further inquiry, and by following the rule of consistency, I am inclined to exercise of discretion in his favour with the consequence that petitioner shall be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 150,000 with two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
H.B.T./A-24/L Bail granted.