YLRN 2017

2017 PLP 186 (YLRN)

KHALID and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar
Decided Date
Bail Petition No.152-P of 2017, decided on 27th February, 2017.
Honorable Judges
Qaiser Rashid Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2017 PLP 186 (YLRN)
Forum / Court Peshawar
Bench Members Qaiser Rashid Khan, J
Parties KHALID 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 186 (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 186 (YLRN)?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Qaiser Rashid Khan, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 PLP 186 (YLRN) (KHALID 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

  • Arifullah Khan for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 452, 148 & 149

Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly

Bail, grant of

Complainant alleged that accused persons fired at her which caused her injury

Though role of indiscriminate firing had been attributed to five accused including a lady but from spot only four empties were retrieved which as per Forensic Science Laboratory report had been fired from one and the same weapon

Complainant had only received a single firearm injury on her left thigh

Husband of complainant was barely two paces away from her, as per site plan, remained unscathed during the alleged indiscriminate firing session of accused party

Motive had been stated to be blood feud in which obvious choice of accused party in such like matters would be male member

Element of exaggerated charge could not be ruled out

Tentative assessment of available record entitled accused persons to concession of bail

Bail was granted accordingly. [Para. 4 of the judgment] Rab Nawaz Khan, A.A.-G. for the State. Yousaf Ali for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.

Accused/petitioners Khalid and Zeeshan alias Shan seek their release on bail in case FIR No.647, dated 12.11.2016, under Sections 324/452/148/149, P.P.C. of Police Station S.I. Abdul Hameed Shaheed (Shabqadar), District Charsadda, with the allegations that they along with their co-accused had fired at the complainant party, with which, the complainant Mst. Imtiaza was hit and injured.

2. Arguments heard and the available record perused.

3. As per FIR, it was the complainant who reported about the incident as to how while she along with her husband had come to the house of their daughter Mst. Shabana when the accused/petitioners accompanied by their co-accused entered the house and started firing at them with their respective weapons which resulted into firearm injury to her. The motive was stated to be blood feud over women folk.

4. Though role of indiscriminate firing has been attributed to 5 accused including a lady but from the spot only 4 empties of 30 bore were retrieved which as per FSL report have been fired from one and the same 30 bore weapon. The complainant has only received a single firearm injury on her left thigh. Moreover, the husband of the complainant, barely 2 paces away from her, as per site plan, remained unscathed during the alleged indiscriminate firing session of the accused party and that too, when the motive has been stated to be blood feud in which the obvious choice of the accused party in such like matters is the male member. Thus, the element of exaggerated charge cannot be ruled out. As such taking a tentative assessment of the available record, I hold the accused/petitioners entitled to the concession of bail. 4(sic). Resultantly, this bail petition is allowed and the accused/petitioners are admitted to bail provided each one of them furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac), with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.

5. Above are the reasons of my short order of the even date vide which petitioners have been admitted to bail.

6. Needless to mention that the observations recorded in this order are tentative in nature and shall not prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial court where the case be decided on its own merits after recording evidence. WA/74/P Bail granted.