2017 PLP 130 (SCMR)
NASAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 PLP 130 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood, JJ |
| Parties | NASAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 PLP 130 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 PLP 130 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 PLP 130 (SCMR) (NASAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Akhtar Hussain Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 19.1.2016 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No.15803-B of 2015)
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 34
Qatl-i-amd, common intention
Joint role in offence attributed
Initial finding of innocence during investigation
According to the FIR the accused and his co-accused had allegedly been seen by some prosecution witnesses pressing the throat of deceased at the dera of co-accused
FIR itself showed that accused had no motive to kill the deceased but the motive was directed against uncle of the deceased
Place of occurrence was the dera of co-accused whereas the accused did not live at the said place
FIR alleged a joint role of the accused and his co- accused and according to the complainant party's own version the eyewitnesses happened to see the occurrence only per chance
During the initial investigation the accused had been opined to be innocent and his name was placed in column No 2 of the challan but after submission of the challan before the Trial Court a fresh investigation had been conducted and the accused had been opined to be guilty
Case against the accused called for further inquiry into his guilt
Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab and Obail Ullah, S.I. for the State. Complainant in person.
Judgment & Decree
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.
Through this petition Nasar petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the order dated 19.01.2016 passed by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 15803-B of 2015 whereby post-arrest bail was refused to him in case FIR No. 500 registered at Police Station Saddar, Chiniot on 15.09.2014 in respect o a offence under section 302, P.P.C. read with section 34, P.P.C.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab appearing for the State and the complainant appearing in person and having gone through the record of investigation of the case we have noticed that according to the FIR the petitioner and his co-accused namely Asghar had allegedly been seen by some prosecution witnesses pressing the throat of Waqar Hussain deceased at the Dera of Asghar co-accused. The FIR itself shows that the petitioner had no motive to kill the deceased but the motive was directed against an uncle of the deceased and the place of occurrence was the Dera of Asghar co-accused whereas the petitioner did not live at that Dera. The FIR alleges a joint role of the petitioner and his co-accused and according to the complainant party's own version the eye-witnesses happened to see the occurrence only per chance. During the initial investigation the petitioner had been, opined to be innocent and his name had taken place in column No. 2 of the Challan but we have been informed that after submission of the Challan before the trial court a fresh investigation had been conducted and after that fresh investigation the petitioner had been opined to be guilty. In view of lack of motive vis-a-vis the present petitioner and a joint role having been attributed to him along with his co-accused coupled with the initial finding of innocence recorded by the investigating officer we have found the case against the petitioner to be a case calling for further inquiry into his guilt. This petition is, therefore, converted into an appeal and the same is allowed and consequently Nasar petitioner is admitted to bail in the above mentioned criminal case subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. MWA/N-14/SC Bail granted.