2013 PLP 701 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD IMRAN alias MANI and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2013 PLP 701 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Anwaarul Haq and Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IMRAN alias MANI and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 PLP 701 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2013 PLP 701 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Anwaarul Haq and Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2013 PLP 701 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD IMRAN alias MANI and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Zafar and Shoaib Zafar for Petitioners.
- ----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/ 109/ 379/ 427/ 148/ 149---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-e-amd, abetment, theft, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, rioting armed with deadly weapons, acts of terrorism---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Ten persons were alleged to have collectively fired at the deceased but no specific injury on the person of the deceased had been attributed to the accused---No weapon of offence had been recovered from the accused---Accused had taken plea of alibi at the time of occurrence by stating that they were present in a court in connection with a criminal case and in this regard, statements of two advocates and court reader were available on the record---Accused were found innocent in three consecutive investigations and their names were placed in column No.2 of the report prepared under S. 173 Cr.P.C.---Question of vicarious liability of accused and evidentiary value of the plea of alibi was to be determined by Trial Court after recording of evidence---Case against accused fell within the purview of S.497(2) Cr.P.C. and was one of further inquiry into their guilt---Bail petition of accused was accepted and they were admitted to bail.
- 5. Be that as it may, admittedly the collective allegation of making firing at the deceased has been levelled against ten accused persons and no specific injury on the persons of the deceased has been attributed to the petitioners. No weapon of offence was recovered from the petitioners. During the investigation the petitioners have taken the plea of alibi that at the time of occurrence they were present in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozewala in connection with the case F.I.R. No.1299 of 2007 and in this regard, statements of two Advocates and Reader of the Court are available on the record and on the basis of the same, petitioners were found innocent in three consecutive investigations and their names were placed in Column No.2 of the report prepared under section 173, Cr.P.C. In view of all above, question of vicarious liability of the petitioners and evidentiary value or the plea of alibi taken by them can validly be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of some evidence. However, case against the petitionrs, in our view, prima facie falls within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. and is one of further inquiry into their guilt. We, therefore, accept this petition and admit the petitioners to post-arrest bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.300,000 (Rupees three hundred thousand only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/ 109/ 379/ 427/ 148/ 149
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7
Qatl-e-amd, abetment, theft, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, rioting armed with deadly weapons, acts of terrorism
Ten persons were alleged to have collectively fired at the deceased but no specific injury on the person of the deceased had been attributed to the accused
No weapon of offence had been recovered from the accused
Accused had taken plea of alibi at the time of occurrence by stating that they were present in a court in connection with a criminal case and in this regard, statements of two advocates and court reader were available on the record
Accused were found innocent in three consecutive investigations and their names were placed in column No.2 of the report prepared under S. 173 Cr.P.C.
Question of vicarious liability of accused and evidentiary value of the plea of alibi was to be determined by Trial Court after recording of evidence
Case against accused fell within the purview of S.497(2) Cr.P.C. and was one of further inquiry into their guilt
Bail petition of accused was accepted and they were admitted to bail. Tariq Javed, Deputy District Public Prosecutor, Naveed Irshad, DSP Ferozewala Circle and Muhammad Younas, Inspector/S.H.O. Police Station Factory Area, Sheikhupura for the State Sher Afghan Asadi for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Through this petition, petitioners Muhammad Imran alias Mani and Tanveer Hussain alias Chammi seek post-arrest bail in Case No.529 of 2011 dated 19-5-2011, offence under sections 302/109/379/427/ 148/149, P.P.C. and section 7 of ATA, 1997, registered at Police Station Factory Area District Sheikhupura.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there is collective allegation against ten accused persons of making firing at the deceased and no specific role has been attributed to the petitioners; that no recovery of any weapon of offence was effected from the petitioners; that in three consecutive investigations conducted by three different police officers both the petitioners were found innocent and the police has placed their names in Column No.2 of the report prepared under section 173, Cr.P.C., that the police after thorough investigation has declared that only two nominated accused namely Khizar Hussain and Akmal Shehzad participated in this occurrence; that motive is also not directly attributed to the petitioners and during the course of investigation they have successfully proved their plea of alibi; that in the circumstances, case against the petitioners is one of further inquiry into their guilt and they are entitled for the bail.
3. On the other hand, learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposing this bail petition contends that in this broad-daylight occurrence four persons have lost their lives; that the petitioners arc nominated in a promptly lodged F.I.R; that specification of injuries in this occurrence was impossible and the F.I.R. has been registered on the basis of natural statement of the complainant; that it is a case of vicarious liability and every accused is responsible for every act of his other co-accused; that declaration of innocence of the petitioners is a mala fide on the part of the police; that initially both the petitioners were challaned showing their names in Column No.3 of the report under section 173 Cr.P.C. but that report is not available on the record and the petitioners with connivance of the police managed disappearance of the same; that deeper appreciation of evidence especially the plea of alibi taken by the petitioners is not permissible at bail stage; that challan in this case has already been submitted and all the accused including the petitioners have been summoned by the learned trial Court.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. Be that as it may, admittedly the collective allegation of making firing at the deceased has been levelled against ten accused persons and no specific injury on the persons of the deceased has been attributed to the petitioners. No weapon of offence was recovered from the petitioners. During the investigation the petitioners have taken the plea of alibi that at the time of occurrence they were present in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozewala in connection with the case F.I.R. No.1299 of 2007 and in this regard, statements of two Advocates and Reader of the Court are available on the record and on the basis of the same, petitioners were found innocent in three consecutive investigations and their names were placed in Column No.2 of the report prepared under section 173, Cr.P.C. In view of all above, question of vicarious liability of the petitioners and evidentiary value or the plea of alibi taken by them can validly be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of some evidence. However, case against the petitionrs, in our view, prima facie falls within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. and is one of further inquiry into their guilt. We, therefore, accept this petition and admit the petitioners to post-arrest bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.300,000 (Rupees three hundred thousand only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
6. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition. MWA/M-53/L Bail granted.