MLD 2021

2021 PLP 2093 (MLD)

MUDASSIR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Peshawar (Bannu Bench)
Decided Date
2021-July-1
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2021 PLP 2093 (MLD)
Forum / Court Peshawar (Bannu Bench)
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUDASSIR — 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 2021 PLP 2093 (MLD)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2021 PLP 2093 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar (Bannu Bench) bench comprising: N/A.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2021 PLP 2093 (MLD) (MUDASSIR — 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

  • Gul Nawaz for Petitioner.
  • Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Assistant Advocate General for the State.
  • 3. Complainant present in court stated that he cannot afford private counsel and would rely on the arguments of learned AAG. Arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and learned AAG heard and available record gone through.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302

Qatl-i-amd

Bail, refusal of

Prompt FIR

Scope

Accused was alleged to have murdered the brother of complainant

Complainant had directly charged the accused in a promptly lodged FIR

Medical report, recovery of blood stained earth from the place of incident and blood stained garments had given further support to the complainant's version

Material pieces of evidence when taken in juxtaposition, a prima facie case was made out against the accused

Forensic Laboratory's report although showed that the empties recovered from the place of occurrence were fired from different weapons but the report prima facie did not entitle the accused to the concession of bail

Accused was connected with the commission of offence which fell within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.

Petition for grant of bail was dismissed, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

SAHIBZADA ASADULLAH, J.

Through present petition the petitioner Mudassir seeks his release on bail in case FIR No.170 dated 28.03.2016 registered under section 302, P.P.C. at police station Naurang, District Lakki Marwat.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 28.3.2016 at 20:20 hours complainant Habibullah alias Mistry along with dead body of his brother Hamdullah Jan lodged report in emergency room civil hospital Naruang to the effect that on the eventful day he and his nephew Sajjad Khan after performing evening prayer were present in their landed property for easement. Meanwhile accused/ petitioner came there and knocked at the door of house of his brother Hamdullah Jan, upon which his brother came out from his house and both came near to them. At about 19:00 hours after exchange of hot words between them, the accused/ petitioner made firing at his brother with pistol with the intention to commit his murder, as a result of which he got hit and fell down. When the complainant and his nephew attended his brother, he had succumbed to his injuries.

3. Complainant present in court stated that he cannot afford private counsel and would rely on the arguments of learned AAG. Arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and learned AAG heard and available record gone through.

4. Perusal of the record reveals that complainant Habib Ullah directly charged single accused/petitioner in a promptly lodged FIR for murder of his brother Hamdullah Jan by firing at him with pistol. Medical report, recovery of blood stained earth from the place of deceased, and blood-stained garments gave further support to the complainant's version. When all these material pieces of evidence taken in juxtaposition, a prima facie case is made out against the accused/petitioner. Though FSL report shows that the empties recovered from the place of accused were fired from different weapons but prima facie report of the fire arms expert does not entitle him for the concession of bail. Further this Court will abstain from commenting on the report of F.S.L at this stage, which will definitely prejudice the case of either party before the trial Court.

5. For the reasons discussed above, on tentative assessment of the record, the accused/petitioner is prima facie connected with the commission of offence, which falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C., hence in the circumstances, the present accused/petitioner is not found entitled for the concession of bail. Resultantly, this petition stands dismissed. SA/138/P Bail declined.