YLRN 2017

2017 PLP 233 (YLRN)

MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.12040/B of 2015, decided on 23rd September, 2015.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Sami Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2017 PLP 233 (YLRN)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Abdul Sami Khan, J
Parties MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE — Petitioner 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 233 (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 233 (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 233 (YLRN) (MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE — Petitioner 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

  • Raja Asif Ali Khan for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 109 & 34

Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Allegation levelled against accused in the FIR, was that he caught hold the arms of the deceased; and in that way had facilitated his co-accused, who had inflicted churri blows to the deceased

Accused had not been attributed any injury to the deceased during the occurrence

Accused was real brother of the principal accused; and taking into consideration the locale and manner of injuries on the body of deceased, there was no need to hold deceased from arms

Possibility of false implication of accused could not be ruled out of consideration

Co-accused who had allegedly caught hold the deceased's legs, had already been allowed bail

Case of accused, was at par with that of co-accused

Accused, also deserved for the same concession in view of rule of consistency

Mere involvement in heinous offence was no ground to withhold the discretion in favour of accused, who otherwise, had made out a good case for grant of bail

Question of vicarious liability of accused for committing the murder of the deceased, would also be determined by the Trial Court after recording evidence in the case

Accused was previous non-convict; investigation of case qua accused, was complete; he was behind the bars since his arrest on 6-11-2014; nothing had been recovered from accused

No useful purpose would be served by continuously keeping accused under incarceration

Case against accused, calling for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C., accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. [Paras. 2 & 3 of the judgment] Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State with Faiq Awan, S.I. with record.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through this petition Muhammad Shafique petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No. 270/14, dated 06.11.2014 registered at Police Station Tanda, District Gujrat in respect of offences under sections 302/109/34, P.P.C.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed by this Court that the allegation leveled against the petitioner in the FIR is that he has caught hold the arms of deceased namely Mst. Sumera Bibi daughter-in-law of the complainant and in this way facilitated his co-accused Ghulam Abbas who has inflicted churri blows to her. Admittedly according to narration of the FIR itself the petitioner has not been attributed any injury to the deceased during the occurrence. The petitioner is real brother of the principal accused namely Ghulam Abbas and taking into consideration the locale and number of injuries on the body of deceased there was no need to hold deceased from arms, therefore, possibility of false implication of the petitioner cannot be ruled out of consideration. It is trend in our society that complainant party tried to entangle maximum person from accused side so that nobody would remain behind to pursue the matter. A co-accused of the petitioner namely Muhammad Nadeem who has allegedly caught-hold the deceased from legs has already been allowed bail by the learned trial court. The case of the petitioner is at par to that of his co-accused namely Muhammad Nadeem who had already been allowed bail by the learned trial court so the petitioner also deserves for the same concession in view of rule of consistency. Mere involvement in a heinousness offence is not ground to withhold the discretion in favour of an accused person who otherwise makes out a good case for grant of bail. Similarly the question of vicarious liability of the petitioner for committing the murder of deceased shall also be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence in this case. The petitioner is previous non-convict, investigation of this case qua the petitioner is complete, he is behind the bars since his arrest, nothing has been recovered from him, thus, no useful purpose would be served by continuously keeping him under incarceration.

3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 100000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. HBT/M-308/L Bail granted.