PCRLJN 2016

2016 P Cr (PLP)

TOTI RAHMAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar (Mingora Bench) Dar-ul-Qaza
Decided Date
2012-August-4
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2016 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Peshawar (Mingora Bench) Dar-ul-Qaza
Bench Members N/A
Parties TOTI RAHMAN — 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 2016 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2016 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar (Mingora Bench) Dar-ul-Qaza bench comprising: N/A.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 P Cr (PLP) (TOTI RAHMAN — 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

  • Sayyed Badshah for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337-A(i), 337-F(i)(iv), 337-L(2) & 34

Causing Shajjah-i-Khafifa, Damiyah, Manaqqilah, hurt, common intention

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Many aspects surrounding the occurrence, were highly debatable

Two-and-half hours delay took place in lodging the report

Out of four persons charged for causing injuries to injured, three had been extended the concession of bail by the courts below

Specific role, though had been attributed to the accused (applicant), for giving axe blow to the injured, but the injury was on non-vital part of the body

Nature of injury was 'Shajjah-i-Khafifa' plus 'Munaqqilah ghair Jaifah'; and punishment provided for such kind of hurt under S.337-F(vi), P.P.C. was payment of 'Daman' and in addition could also be punished with imprisonment of seven years

Grant of bail in offences punishable with imprisonment for less than ten years, was a rule and refusal an exception

Nothing was on record that accused was previous convict, habitual or hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal

Investigation in the case was complete, and accused was no more required for further investigation

Tentative assessment of material available on record showed that case of accused, came within the domain of further inquiry

Accused, was released on bail, in circumstances. [Paras. 4 & 5 of the Judgment]

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL LATIF KHAN, J.

Having failed to secure relief from the Courts below, Toti Rehman, involved in case FIR No. 243 dated 19.6.2014 under sections 337-A(i)/337-F(i)(vi)/337-L(2)/34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station, Gandigar, Dir Upper, has applied for bail before this Court.

2. Complainant Muhammad Iqbal in injured condition, in the company of injured Wali Rehman and Baqir Hussain, lodged a report in civil hospital, Wari, to police that on 13.6.2014 their children had gone to Musa Kas for bringing wheat bundles, followed by them and when they reached near the house of Sahib Zada where at 18.30 hours they found Toti Rehman, Latif, Bashir and Zia ur Rehman while scuffling with their children. Toti Rehman was armed with axe and they intended to separate them but in the meanwhile Toti Rehman gave axe blow to Wali Rehman due to which he received injury on his left foot ankle while Bashir and Latif gave him stone blows on his head as a result of which he received injuries on his eyebrow while he received injuries on his ribs and wrist as a result of stone blows of Bashir whereas Baqir Hussain received injuries on his elbow as a result of stone blows of Zia ur Rehman, as such, the above referred FIR was registered.

3. Arguments heard and record perused.

4. Many aspects surrounding the occurrence are highly debatable, which makes the case of petitioner of further inquiry into his guilt. The record divulges that there is two and half hours delay in lodging of the report as the occurrence is alleged to have been taken place on 13.6.2014 at 18.30 hours while report has been lodged on the same day at 21.00 hours whereas the distance between Police Station and place of occurrence is 4/5 k.m. The contents of FIR reveals that Muhammad Iqbal, complainant, had lodged report in injured condition in civil hospital, Wari, and his injury sheet was prepared on the same date, i.e. on 13.6.2014 but the medico legal report available on injury sheet reveals that Muhammad Iqbal, complainant, had come with his relative to hospital on 16.6.2014 at 7.14 p.m after three days of the occurrence and probable duration of injury has also been mentioned as 3/4 days. The record further reveals that four persons have been charged for causing injuries to Muhammad Iqbal, Wali Rehman and Baqi Rehman. Out of the four, three accused, namely, Latif, Bashir and Zai Rehman have been extended with the concession of bail by the courts below. The contents of FIR reveals that the accused Latif and Bashir, who have been granted bail, have been charged for giving stone blows while the present petitioner has been charged for giving axe blow to the injured Wali Rehman. No doubt specific role has been attributed to petitioner for giving axe blow to the injured Wali Rehman but the injury is on non-vital part of the body, therefore, the case of petitioner is of further inquiry.

5. Quite apart from the above, the medico legal report of Wali Rehman injured reveals that nature of injury is 'shajjah-i-khafifa' plus 'munaqqilah ghair jaifah' and punishment provided for such kind of hurt under section 337-F(vi), P.P.C. is payment of 'Daman' and in addition may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years. The payment of 'Daman' is mandatory while punishment of imprisonment as ta'zir provided for the offence has been left to the discretion of the Court keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case. Grant of bail in offences punishable with imprisonment for less than ten years is a rule and refusal is an exception. There is nothing on record that the petitioner is previous convict, habitual or hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. Moreover, investigation in the case is complete and the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. On tentative assessment of material available on record, the case of the petitioner comes within the domain of further inquiry and, as such, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail. For the aforesaid reasons, this bail petition is allowed and the petitioner be released on bail if he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (two lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. These are the reasons of short order announced on 4.8.2014. HBT/430/P Bail granted.