2017 PLP 239 (YLRN)
WAHID ULLAH alias KING — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 PLP 239 (YLRN) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) |
| Bench Members | Abdul Sami Khan, J |
| Parties | WAHID ULLAH alias KING — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 PLP 239 (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 239 (YLRN)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) 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 239 (YLRN) (WAHID ULLAH alias KING — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Zia Hussain Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 148 & 149
Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting, common object
Accused though was nominated in FIR with allegation that he inflicted firearm injury on the shoulder of injured prosecution witness, but said injured witness, in his statement under S.161, Cr.P.C., categorically stated that, neither accused was armed with pistol, nor he had made firing at the spot at the time of occurrence
Case, in circumstances, had become a case of two versions; one brought forward by the complainant and the other surfaced on record during investigation through the statement of injured witness
As to which version was correct, would be determined by the Trial Court after recording evidence
Accused having not caused any injury to the deceased, question of sharing common intention with his co-accused for committing murder of the deceased, would be determined by the Trial Court after recording evidence
Accused was previous non-convict
Accused was behind the bars since 18-8-2015
Investigation of the case was complete; and accused was no more required for further investigation
Further incarceration of accused in jail, would not serve any useful purpose
Case of accused having become one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C., accused, was granted bail, in circumstances. [Paras. 2 & 3 of the judgment] 2012 SCMR 1137 and 2014 SCMR 1502 rel. Sh. Istajabat Ali, D.P.-G. for the State and Rehan, S.I. with record.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.
Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.238/2014 dated 17.04.2014 under sections 302, 324, 148, 149, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Ratta Amral, Rawalpindi.
2. The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties have been heard and record of this case has also been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation is not allowed at this stage. Although the petitioner is named in FIR with the allegation that he inflicted firearm injury on the shoulder of Hamza injured PW, yet the fact remains that said injured PW in his statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. categorically stated that neither the petitioner was armed with pistol nor has made firing at the spot at the time of occurrence. Hence this case has become a case of two versions; one brought forward by the complainant and the second surfaced on record during investigation through the statement of injured PW and which version is correct shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. Reliance can be placed upon 2012 SCMR 1137. Admittedly the petitioner has not caused any injury to the deceased, therefore the question of sharing common intention with his co-accused for committing murder of the deceased shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. Reliance can be placed upon 2014 SCMR 1502. The petitioner is previous non-convict. He is behind the bars since 18.08.2015. Investigation of the case is complete and he is no more required for further investigation. His further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose.
3. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only. HBT/W-1/L Bail granted.