2003 P Cr (PLP)
SHER KHAN and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHER KHAN and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
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 Peshawar 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) (SHER KHAN and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Suhail Akhtar for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324 & 34
Bail, grant of-- Further inquiry
Three persons had been charged for causing two injuries on the person of the complainant
Whether it could be the doing of one person or more than one; whose fire turned effective, if at all they were present and whether they could be saddled with the intention to kill the complainant when the injuries were not on the vital part of the body, were the questions which essentially required further inquiry particularly when the probability of false implication in view of the tendency of the people to throw wide net of implication to rope, in even those who had no Land in the commission of the crime, could not be, ruled out
Accused were directed to be released on bail in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Abdul Karim for the State. Zar Muhammad Afridi for the Complainant. Date of hearing :17th March 2003 The petitioners who are charged in a case registered against them under sections 324/34, P.P.C. vide F. I. R. No.-685 dated 6-8-2002, Police Station, Hangu, seek their release on bail mainly on the ground that for two injuries, as many as three persons have been charged without specifying as, to whose fire turned effective.
2. The learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel or the complainant oppose the grant of bail, on the ground that the petitioners being directly charged are not entitled to be released on bail especially when they became fugitive from law after the commission of the crime.
3. I have gone through the record and carefully considered' the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
4. The record reveals that there are two injuries on the person or the complainant for which as, many, as three persons have been charged. Whether it could be the doing, of one, person or more than one; whose fire turned effective, if at all they were-present and whether they can be saddled with the intention to kill the complaint when the injuries are not on the vital part of the body, are the questions which essentially require further inquiry particularly when the possibility, at the moment. of false implication in view the tendency of the people to throw wide the net of implication to rope in even, those who have no hand in the commission of the crime, cannot be ruled out.
5. For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and the petitioners are directed to be released on bail, if they, furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.3,00,000 (Rs. Three lacs) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Illqa/Judicial Magistrate who is to ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men or means. M.B.A./7836/P Bail Granted