PCRLJ 2003

2003 P Cr (PLP)

TALIB HUSSAIN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
2003-March-25
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2003 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members N/A
Parties TALIB HUSSAIN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 P Cr (PLP) (TALIB HUSSAIN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • I have heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Assistant Advocate-General.
  • The joint reading of both the F.I.Rs. reveals that there was a fight between 8 persons on one side and 7 on the other, majority of them being armed with Lathis. Bone of contention is also common in both cases as it is alleged that the adversary in each case opposed use of the same common path. It was almost a free fight. As per Medical Certificate two injuries were caused to Sulleman, which are attributed to applicant Talib, one of these injuries is Shajah-e-Madiah punishable with Qisas, Arsh and imprisonment for 5 years, while the other injury is Jurh Ghayr Jaifah Damiah punishable with Daman and imprisonment for one year. Applicant Ghulam Sarwar, allegedly, caused an injury to Shahban and the Medical Certificate shows that it was a Jurh Ghayr Jaifah Damiah. In view of this, the offences do not Fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The point of aggression is yet to be determined at the trial. Moreover, the applicants have remained in custody for a period of more than 9 months. Learned Assistant Advocate-General also, in the circumstances enumerated above, did not oppose the bail.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337-A(i), (ii), F-(i), F(v), 114, 147 & 148

Bail, grant of

Case was of two versions and both F.I.Rs. filed by opposing parties had revealed that there was a fight between 8 persons on one side and 7 on the other, majority of them were armed with Lathis and the bone of contention was also common in both cases

Incident was almost a free fight

Medical report revealed that one of injuries attributed to accused was ' Shajah-e-Madiah' punishable with Qisas, Arsh and imprisonment for 5 years while other injury was "Ghayr Jaifah Damiah" punishable with Daman and imprisonment for one year

Injury attributed to other accused according to Medical Certificate was 'Jurh Ghayr Jaifah Damiah'

Offence against accused did not. fall within prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C. and point of aggression was yet to be determined at the trial

Accused were in custody for a period of more than 9 months

Accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

Shamsuddin A. Soomro for Applicants. Ali Azhar Tunio, Asstt. A.-G for the State. The applicants have sought bail in a case pending in the Court of ,Civil Judge and F.C.M., Thull for an offence under sections 337-A(i), (ii), F-(i), F-(v), 114, 147 and 148, P.P.C. The incident is said to have taken place on 19-6-2002 at 6-00 p.m. in which two parties engaged in free fight. According to the F.I.R. in the instant case lodged by Muhammad Moosa, there were 8 assailants namely Bhagio empty-handed, Baboo alias Moula Dad armed with hatchet, Ghulam Hussain alias Wadero, Khadim Hussain, Talib Hussain, Ghulam Sarwar and Hamal each armed with a Lathi and Anwar armed with a shot gun. As per F.LR. in the counter case lodged by Moula Dad alias Babu at the same police station, the assailants were Muhammad Moosa (complainant in the present case), Mulla Kouro, Abdul Latif, Muhammad Bux, Sher Muhammad, Shahban and Muhammad Yousif who were armed with Lathis except Muhammad Shahban who had a gun. The dispute between the parties had arisen over use of a common thoroughfare, each party alleging that the opposite-party restrained them from using the same. The houses of both parties are adjoining each other. It is alleged in the F.I.R. in the present case that applicant Talib Hussain gave Lathi blows to Muhammad Sulleman and Ghulam Sarwar inflicted Lathi blows upon Shahban. The present applicants were arrested on 2-7-2002. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Assistant Advocate-General. The joint reading of both the F.I.Rs. reveals that there was a fight between 8 persons on one side and 7 on the other, majority of them being armed with Lathis. Bone of contention is also common in both cases as it is alleged that the adversary in each case opposed use of the same common path. It was almost a free fight. As per Medical Certificate two injuries were caused to Sulleman, which are attributed to applicant Talib, one of these injuries is Shajah-e-Madiah punishable with Qisas, Arsh and imprisonment for 5 years, while the other injury is Jurh Ghayr Jaifah Damiah punishable with Daman and imprisonment for one year. Applicant Ghulam Sarwar, allegedly, caused an injury to Shahban and the Medical Certificate shows that it was a Jurh Ghayr Jaifah Damiah. In view of this, the offences do not Fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The point of aggression is yet to be determined at the trial. Moreover, the applicants have remained in custody for a period of more than 9 months. Learned Assistant Advocate-General also, in the circumstances enumerated above, did not oppose the bail. In view of the circumstances discussed above, the application is allowed. The applicants be released on bail, each furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 and executing P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./J-49/K Application allowed.