Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: RAJA VS Respondent: THE STATE
1988 P Cr
1988 P Cr. L J 1952
[Lahore]
Before Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J
RAJA and others‑‑Petitioners
versus
THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1141/B of 1988, decided on 13th April, 1988.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Allegations against accused that he caused injuries to prosecution witnesses‑‑Case of accused at par with co‑accused who had been admitted ‑to bail‑‑Accused also granted bail.
Ch. Muhammad Hussain Chhachhar for Petitioners.
Muhammad Sharif Butt for the State.
Date of hearing: 13th April, 1988.
JUDGMENT
This is a petition for bail on behalf of Raja, Amin and Baggu petitioners, who are involved in a case under sections 148, 452,.365, 325, 308 and 302/149 of the P.P.C.
2. The occurrence took place on 19‑1‑1988 at 7/8 a.m. in which Sajwara, Siddique, Suleman and Mst. Waziran suffered injuries. Initially the case was registered under sections 148, 308 and 325/149 of the P.P.C. Mst. Waziran suffered only one injury during the occurrence at the hands of co‑accused Bashir, which ultimately resulted in her death on 26‑1‑1988. Section 302, P.P.C. was, therefore, subsequently added.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the case of the petitioners is at par with that of Ahmad and Muhammad Ibrahim co‑accused who have been admitted to bail by this Court. He submits that the only additional circumstance against Raja petitioner, brought through the supplementary statement of Muhammad Siddique complainant, is that he alongwith other accused brought out Sajwara in the street whereafter he was injured by them. Learned State counsel does not controvert this contention.
4. Ahmad Ali and Muhammad 'Ibrahim co‑accused were admitted to bail on the ground that they were not alleged to have caused any injury to Mst. Waziran deceased, and the only allegation against them was that they caused simple injuries to Suleman and Siddique P.Ws. It was further observed that Ahmad Ali accused was examined on the same day and nineteen injuries were found on his person. The case of the petitioners is at par with that of co‑accused Ahmad Ali and Muhammad Ibrahim. I, therefore, admit them to bail in the sum of Rs.25,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . , Okara.
M. Y. H./R‑92/L Bail granted.