YLR 2009

2009 PLP 2111 (YLR)

ALLAH BUX — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Bail Application No.283 of 2009, decided on 22nd June, 2009.
Honorable Judges
Syed Shafqat Ali Shah Masoomi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2009 PLP 2111 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Syed Shafqat Ali Shah Masoomi, J
Parties ALLAH BUX — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 2111 (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 2009 PLP 2111 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Syed Shafqat Ali Shah Masoomi, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 2111 (YLR) (ALLAH BUX — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 147, 148 & 149

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Name of accused though transpired in the F.I.R., but allegations of aerial firing only were attributed to him, which were general in nature

At the time of occurrence accused was allegedly having T.T. pistol in his hand, but no overt act had been attributed to him

No recovery had been effected from accused, though he had been shown armed with T.T. pistol

Mashirnama of place of Wardat had revealed that five empties of KK were secured and not a single empty of T. T. pistol was secured

Specific role of firing at the deceased had been attributed to co-accused

Vicarious liability of accused was yet to be determined at the time of trial

Case against accused requiring further inquiry, he was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Yaroo v. The State 2004 SCMR 864 and Aftab Hussain v. The State 2004 SCMR 1467 ref. Manzoor Hussain N. Larik for Applicant. Ali Haider Ada Dareshani for the State.

Judgment & Decree

SYED SHAFQAT ALI SHAH MASOOMI, J.

By this application, the applicant has sought bail after arrest, who is wanted in crime No.130 of 2001 of Police Station, Gambat, registered for an offence under sections 302, 324, 147, 148, 149, P.P.C. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 18-9-2001 at 0215 hours at night complainant Palyo Khan lodged an F.I.R. stating that deceased Qadir Bux alias Qadoo alias Fouji was his brother-in-law and on the day of report, the complaint having torch in his hand, he along with his said brother in law Qadir Bux and nephew Pir Bux after taking meal went to Otaq and when they reached at agricultural land of Azoo Khan at about 0015 hours at night, all, of sudden they heard intimidation from southern side to stop them and the complainant saw in the light of torch Muhammad Maroof Kaleri with gun whereas master Abdul Rasheed with Kalashnikov, while the present applicant Allah Bux with TT Pistol. It is alleged that master Miandad and two unidentified persons were standing with guns. Accused Abdul Rasheed made fire of Kalashnikov at complainant's brother in law Qadir Bux alias Qadoo alias Fouji, which hit him on his left shoulder and fell down. The complainant and his nephew Pir Bux also fell down and slept and saved themselves and thereafter the accused fled away towards western side by making fires and that on their cries, Muhammad Zaman and Fiaz Muhammad and other villagers came there and they also saw the accused in the light of torch and then the complainant party saw Qadir Bux lying dead on earth; hence above F.I.R. was lodged. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned State counsel, who has conceded to the grant of bail to the applicant. The learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the case reported as Yaroo v. The State 2004 SCMR 864 and Aftab Hussain v. The State 2004 SCMR 1467. From the perusal of record as well as F.I.R., it reveals that the name of the present applicant transpires in the F.I.R. but there are allegations of aerial firing attributed to the applicant, which are general in nature that he at the time of occurrence having TT Pistol in his hand, no overt act has been attributed to him, no recovery has been effected from the present applicant though he has been shown armed with TT pistol, whereas the Mashirnama of place of wardat reveals that five empties of KK were secured and not a single empty of TT pistol, was secured and that the specific role of firing at the deceased Qadir Bux has been attributed to co-accused master Abdul Rasheed. As such his vicarious liability is yet to be determined at the time of trial; hence the case requires further enquiry. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case into consideration, I allow this application and grant bail to the applicant subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.400,000 (Rs. four lac only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. However, the, observations made herein above are tentative in nature for the purpose of only disposal of bail application and may not influence the mind of trial Court, which is free to appraise the evidence strictly according to merits of the case. H.B.T./A-109/K Bail granted.