YLR 2012

2012 PLP 548 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD ALI and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Sindh
Decided Date
Criminal Bail Application No.257 of 2011, decided on 14th June, 2011.
Honorable Judges
Ghulam Sarwar Korai, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2012 PLP 548 (YLR)
Forum / Court Sindh
Bench Members Ghulam Sarwar Korai, J
Parties MUHAMMAD ALI and another — Applicants 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 2012 PLP 548 (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 2012 PLP 548 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: Ghulam Sarwar Korai, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 548 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ALI and another — Applicants 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)

Representation

  • 4. Heard Mr. Khait Kumar Khatri Advocate for the applicants and Syed Meeral Shah learned D.P.-G. for the State and perused the case file.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324/337-H(2)/452/504/147/148/149

Attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, hurt by rash or negligent act, house-trespassing and intentional insult

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Complainant had not alleged any role against accused persons who allegedly were armed with pistols

One accused had allegedly fired upon the complainant which hit him on his head, but that version was contradictory

Entire case of the prosecution was of further inquiry

Challan had been filed and accused were no more required for further investigation while they were behind the bars since their arrest viz 21-1-2011

Bail could not be withheld as punishment

Allegations whatever they mights be were to be proved after recording the evidence of material witnesses

Accused persons were entitled to be released on bail, in circumstances. Khait Kumar Khatri for Applicant. Syed Meeral Shah Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh for the State.

Judgment & Decree

GHULAM SARWAR KORAI, J.

Through this application, the applicants seek their release on bail in case Crime No.17 of 2011 registered at Police Station Kotri under sections 324, 337 H(2), 452, 504, 147,148, 149 P.P.C.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 17-1-2011 at 1300 hours, complainant Lal Zareen lodged F.I.R. at Police Station Kotri stating therein that on 12-4-2010 Shafique Mangi and others committed robbery from his house, therefore, F.I.R. No.153 of 2010 for offence under section 17(3) Offence against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 was registered against them such case is still pending adjudication before the Court of law, therefore, accused Shafique issued threats to the complainant that he would commit his murder. On 14-1-2011 at 0330 hours, door of the complainant's house was allegedly knocked while the complainant and his family members were sleeping in their house, they woke up; complainant opened the door and saw Shafique, Muhammad Ali, Ashfaque Ali all sons of Qurban Ali Mangi resident of Bhitai Colony, Kotri along with two unknown persons with open faces entered in the house of complainant. They were armed with pistols. Accused Shafique abused the complainant and asked as to why he has not withdrawn from the case, therefore, he will not be spared. Saying so, applicant Muhammad Ali fired from his pistol upon the complainant with intention to commit his murder, which fire hit to him on his head in angular direction and crossed scattering on his head and complainant fell down. The neighbourers came there and all the accused made their escape.

3. After registration of F.I.R. applicants were arrested on 21-1-2011. Their bail application was filed but the same was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Kotri vide order dated 4-3-2011 that has been impugned in the present bail application.

4. Heard Mr. Khait Kumar Khatri Advocate for the applicants and Syed Meeral Shah learned D.P.-G. for the State and perused the case file.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the case against the applicants is false one as earlier another F.I.R. No.153 of 2010 for offence under section 17(3) Offence against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 was registered against the applicants and they were granted bail. He further submits that it is quite unbelievable that applicants and others armed with pistols entered in the house of the complainant at odd hours and only applicant Shafique abused the complainant and issued fire from his pistol with intention to commit his murder but he received scratch on his head. He further submits that there is contradiction in between F.I.R., mashirnama of injuries and medical certificate as according to F.I.R., the complainant sustained one injury, according to mashirnama of injuries, he received five injuries and according to medical certificate he sustained three injuries, therefore, case of prosecution is of further inquiry. He further submits that applicants were unaware about registration of the case and while attending the Sessions case, they were arrested on 21-1-2011. He further submits that both the applicants and co-accused were allegedly armed with pistol but nothing was done by them except applicant No.1 and allegation against him is of further inquiry. He further submits that opinion of the Doctor shows that the complainant sustained injury by hard and blunt substance. He lastly submitted that investigation has been completed, challan has been filed and applicants are no more required for further investigation, therefore, he prays that they may be released on bail.

6. This bail application has been opposed by the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General Sindh on the ground that applicants are named in the F.I.R. while they along with other accused duly armed with pistols entered in the house of complainant at odd hours and fired upon him.

7. The complainant has not alleged any role against applicant No.2 and others, who were allegedly armed with pistols, applicant No.1 allegedly fired upon the complainant which hit him on his head and his version is contradictory, as per F.I.R. he received one injury, as per mashirnama of injuries he received five injuries and as per medical certificate, he received three injuries. The injuries have been declared by the Doctor to have been caused by hard and blunt substance. In my opinion, entire case of the prosecution is of further inquiry. Challan has been filed and applicants are no more required for further investigation while they are behind the bars since their arrest viz. 21-1-2011. It is well-settled principle of law that bail cannot be withheld as punishment. The allegations whatever may be, but are to be proved after recording the evidence of material witnesses. At this stage, under these circumstances, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail, therefore, this application was allowed vide short order dated 8-6-2011 and these are the reasons of the same. H.B.T./M-197/K Bail granted.