2012 PLP 1615 (YLR)
DHANI BUX alias DINO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2012 PLP 1615 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Sarwar Korai, J |
| Parties | DHANI BUX alias DINO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 1615 (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 1615 (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 1615 (YLR) (DHANI BUX alias DINO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 498 & 498-A
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324/149/504/114/337-H(2)/403/ 147/148
Attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, unlawful assembly, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, abettor presented when offence committed, hurt by rash or negligent act, dishonest misappropriation of property, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapons
Interim pre-arrest bail, confirmation of
F.I.R. was registered with a delay of about 14 days which created doubt in the prosecution case
Accused was allegedly armed with a gun and he fired one shot which allegedly hit the injured on his arm and though other co-accused were armed with weapons but nothing was done by them except aerial firing
Witnesses were relatives of the complainant, therefore, there was no likelihood of tampering with the evidence by the accused
Remanding accused to jail would have served no purpose to the prosecution
Accused had been cooperative with the investigation since he was granted interim pre-arrest bail
Interim pre-arrest bail allowed to accused was confirmed, in circumstances. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
GHULAM SARWAR KORAI, J.
On 27-6-2009 complainant lodged F.I.R. by stating that on 13-6-2010 he along with his brother Allah Jurrio, his maternal nephew Nizamuddin and Azam went to meet with his daughter at village Saleh Panar in the house of Ghulam Mustafa. Complainant saw Ghulam Qadir alias Momin, Dhani Bux, and Gahi Khan armed with guns, Manzoor armed with pistol, Roshan armed with country made pistol, Nawaz armed with pistol, came there. Meanwhile they were instigated by accused Ghulam Qadir therefore, applicant Dhani Bux allegedly fired from his gun at Nizamuddin which hit him on his left arm, who raised cries and fell down. Then complainant party was maltreated by all accused and thereafter all accused made their escape by abusing complainant party and making aerial firing. Complainant further alleged that he was deprived of Rs.5000. After registration of the F.I.R. applicant and others filed their pre-arrest bail application in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Dadu on 2-7-2010. Firstly the interim bail was granted to the co-accused on 6-7-2010 but bail application of the applicant was dismissed therefore, the applicant approached this Court through the present bail application on 15-7-2010 and on 15-7-2010 interim bail was granted to him and the matter was adjourned for confirmation or otherwise for 12-8-2010 and again for 30-8-2010. Heard Mr. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Musab Baleegh Dhamrah, learned State counsel. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the F.I.R. is registered with the delay of about 14 days and injured allegedly received injury on his arm which is not vital part of the body. He further contended that in all six persons were implicated by the complainant and all were allegedly armed with guns and pistols but nothing was done by the co-accused except by the present applicant who allegedly fired one shot from gun which hit Nizamuddin on his arm therefore these allegations do not fulfil the definition of section 324, P.P.C. while punishment of the remaining sections does not come within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. therefore, he prayed for bail. Admittedly the F.I.R. was registered with the delay of about 14 days, the applicant was allegedly armed with gun and he fired one shot which allegedly hit to Nizamuddin on his arm though other accused were armed with guns and pistols but nothing was done by them except aerial firing. There may be dispute between the parties but late registration of the F.I.R. create doubt in the case of prosecution. Co-accused have been granted pre-arrest bail though case of the applicant is not identical to the case of co-accused but atleast his case is fit for grant of bail after arrest and if he is remanded to jail then no purpose will be served for the prosecution and again he is to be released on bail after arrest. The witnesses are relative of the complainant therefore there is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence by the applicant. After grant of interim pre-arrest bail on 15-7-2010 therefore complaint that he is non-co-operative with the investigation. Keeping in view the above position, this bail application was allowed on 30-8-2010 and these are the reasons of my short order. M.W.A./D-4/K Bail allowed.