YLRN 2017

2017 PLP 161 (YLRN)

IMRAN HAIDER and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.3322-B of 2016, decided on 26th May, 2016.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Sami Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2017 PLP 161 (YLRN)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Abdul Sami Khan, J
Parties IMRAN HAIDER and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
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 2017 PLP 161 (YLRN)?

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 161 (YLRN)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Sami Khan, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 PLP 161 (YLRN) (IMRAN HAIDER and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Kamboh for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 337A(i), 337A(ii), 337F(i), 337F(iii), 337L(2), 354, 452, 324, 109, 147 & 149

Qatl-i-amd, hurt, assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty, house trespass after preparation for hurt assault or wrongful restraint, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abetment, rioting, unlawful assembly

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Allegation against accused was that he inflicted "danda" (stick) blows to the deceased

Only injury observed by doctor during postmortem examination on the dead body was on his head and the same had been specifically attributed to co-accused

Co-accused had been assigned the role of inflicting hatchet blow on the head of complainant and had admittedly not caused injury to the deceased

Injury attributed to co-accused had been declared as Shajjah-i-Mudihah falling under S.337A(ii), Penal Code, 1860 which did not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497 Cr.P.C.

Vicarious liability of accused persons in murder of deceased as well as sharing common intention by them with the co-accused for committing murder of deceased shall be determined by Trial Court after recording evidence

Accused persons were previous non-convicts and never involved in any other case of like nature

Investigation of case was complete and they were not required for further investigation

Accused persons were behind the bars since 30.11.2015 without any fruitful progress in conclusion of trial, therefore their further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose

Case of accused persons had become one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of S.497, Cr. P. C.

Bail was granted accordingly. [Para. 2 of the judgment] Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor-General for the State and Saleem, A.S.I. with record.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioners have sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No.551/15 dated 08.08.2015 under sections 302, 337A(i), 337A(ii), 337F(i), 337F(iii) 337L(2), 354, 452, 324, 109, 147, 149, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Bhikhi, District Sheikhupura.

2. The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record of this case has been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation is not allowed at this stage. As per FIR, the allegation against Imran Haider petitioner is that he inflicted "danda" blows on the body of Shaban Akhtar deceased. In this regard, it has been noticed by this Court that the only injury observed by the doctor during postmortem examination on the dead body of Shaban Akhtar deceased was on his head and the same has been specifically attributed to Haider Ali co-accused, whereas no injury on other parts of body of the deceased could be observed. Similarly Naseer Ahmad petitioner has been assigned the role of inflicting hatchet blow on the head of Sobia Ilyas complainant and he has admittedly not caused any injury to the deceased. The injury attributed to Naseer Ahmad petitioner has been declared as Shajjah-i-mudihah falling under section 337A(ii) P.P.C. which does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Vicarious liability of the petitioners in the murder of Shaban Akhtar deceased as well as sharing of common intention by them with their co-accused for committing murder of deceased shall be determined by the learned trial Court after recording evidence. Admittedly the petitioners are previous non-convict and never involved in any other case of such like nature. Investigation of the case is complete and they are no more required for further investigation. They are behind the bars since 30.11.2015 without any fruitful progress in conclusion of their trial, therefore, their further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose.

3. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioners becomes one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioners are granted bail after arrest subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only. WA/I-20/L Bail granted.