Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: BILAL VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Khawaja Muhammad Sharif Title: BILAL vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Miscellaneous No,7071/B of 2004 Date of Judgment:2004-10-19 Reported As: 2005 P C R L J 1703 Result: Bail granted
Judgment ORDER ' Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner was named in the F.I.R. But later on the complainant filed a Constitutional petition before this Court which was disposed of with a direction to the Investigating Officer to record his supplementary statement which was recorded, that according to the said supplementary statement name of the petitioner is not mentioned as an accused and that case of the petitioner does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. 2. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2-A. Muhammad Idrees S.-I. Has appeared along with the record. He informed this Court, in open Court, that there are statements of Hazi Azhar, Liaqat Gujjar and Muhammad Wazir implicating the petitioner in the case. I have myself gone through the supplementary statement and the statements of the above-said three persons. Nazir Muhammad exonerated the petitioner in the supplementary statement. Perusal of the statements of Hazi Azhar, Liaqat Gujjar and Muhammad Wazir shows that neither of them have implicated the petitioner in the said statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. I am sorry to say that S.-I. Muhammad Idrees informed this Court that all the three above mentioned witnesses have implicated the petitioner through their above statements. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record produced by Idrees S.-I. Including the supplementary statements, the case diaries and the statements of Hazi Azhar, Liaqat Gujjar and Muhammad Wazir recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. And having given anxious consideration to the submissions made at the Bar. I am of the considered view that the
---
## Page 2
case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry falling under subsection (2) to section 497, Cr.P.C. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.