PCRLJ 1990

1990 P Cr (PLP)

KHADIM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
23rd August 1989
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1990 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members N/A
Parties KHADIM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 P Cr (PLP) (KHADIM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34

Bail, grant of

Accused was armed with a hatchet at the time of incident

Accused alongwith his father and two brothers allegedly committed double murder of his own sister and her paramour as Karo Kari

Role attributed to accused was that he caused hatchet injuries to the male deceased after he had fallen down by receiving fire shots tired by his father

Main accused was let off by the police on proof of alibi-- Witnesses had not explained injuries on the p,rson of deceased

Deceased had received fire-arm and blunt weapon injuries

Lesser penalty might be imposed in a case of Karo-Kari

Case, being that of further enquiry, bail was granted in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

Abdul Hakeen Bijarani for Applicant. Zawar Hussain Jafferi, A.A.-G. for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd August 1989. Applicant is facing trial alongwith other co-accused for offence under section 302/34, P.P.C. 1t is a case of the prosecution that four accused persons committed double murder of Ali Muhammad and Mst. Laila after declaring them I:,tro and Kari. Incident took place on 27-1-1989 at 2-00 p.m. near the house of accused persons in Deh Malin Deceased Mst. Laila was daughter of co-accused Eli Hasan. Applicant Khadim and two other co-accused, namely, Deedar and Ali 1:m are sons of Ali Hasan. According to F.1.R. Ali Hasan was armed with gun and he fired at Ali Muhammad who fell down injured. Remaining three co -accused including Khadim who were all armed with hatchets then went near and two hatchet injuries to Ali Muhammad, who died at the spot. Accused persons do cleared that Ali Muhammad was Karo with Mst. Laila and killed her as well.

2. Bail plea of applicant Khadim is urged that it is a case of further enquiry on following grounds. Firstly during investigation main accused Ali Hasan was let Off by police as he produced evidence of alibi supported by three witnesses who were examined by the Magistrate under section 164, Cr.P.C. and they claimed Ali Hasan was with them at Kandhkot at the time when incident took place in Deh Malin It is further submitted that this fact will throw doubt on the veracity of the eye-witnesses who are even otherwise closely related to Ali Muhammad except Qamardin 1t is the prosecution case that these witnesses alongwith Ali Muhammad came to the house of Ali Hasan, where Ali Muhammad declared that he had beer called to cut wood and then went out and after a short while cries were heard and these witnesses went out and saw the incident. Second ground is that these eye-witnesses probably have not seen the incident as is claimed by them because they have not explained injuries on the person of All Muhammad. According to F.I.R. Ali Muhammad was shot at by Ali Hasan, and then hatchet injuries were given to him by the remaining three accused persons As against that according to post-mortem report it is found that Ali Muhammad has sustained 10 injuries three fire-arm injuries and two injuries caused by hard and blunt substance. 1t is also submitted by the learned counsel that as per prosecution case motive shows that it is a case of Karo-Kari, as such trial Court after evaluation of evidence may award lesser sentence and even on that ground it becomes a case of further enquire For the facts and reasons stated above I admit applicant to bail in the sum of Rs.50 000 with one surety and P.R. in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. S.A./K194/K Bail granted.