2012 PLP 1066 (YLR)
ALLAHYAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2012 PLP 1066 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | Shahid Anwar Bajwa, J |
| Parties | ALLAHYAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 1066 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 1066 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: Shahid Anwar Bajwa, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 1066 (YLR) (ALLAHYAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324/109/114/148/149
Qatl-e-amd, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, abetment, abettor present when offence is committed, rioting armed with deadly weapons
Local rivalry
Accused was alleged to have instigated his co-accused, upon which they fired, which resulted in the death of complainant's nephew
Contention of accused that he was only alleged to have raised proverbial hakal and according to F.I.R. he was empty-handed, therefore, there could be no question of even ineffective firing against him
Present case was of typical local rivalries and although accused had gone with the intention to commit a crime but he had not fired
Accused was released on bail, in circumstances. Mumaras v. The State PLD 2009 SC 385 distinguished. Abdul Rehman v. Javed and 2 others 2002 SCMR 1415 fol. Manzoor Hussain Larik for Applicant. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi D.P.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, J.
F.I.R. No.215 of 2010 was recorded at Police Station Gambat for an incident allegedly have taken place on 22-9-2010. The complainant stated that 10 years back earlier one Noor Muhammad Keleri was injured and in that case brother of complainant was challaned but was released on bail by the court. Thereafter the dispute was amicably settled. However the injured carried on the grudge and on the fateful day a group of four persons came, out of those persons, the present applicant is alleged to have instigated others, upon which co-accused persons fired. The fire resulting in death of nephew of the complainant and such F.I.R. was lodged. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that only allegation against the applicant is of proverbial hakal. He submitted that in F.I.R. it is stated that the applicant was empty-handed. Therefore, there could be no question of even ineffective firing against the applicant. He submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely involved due to typical local rivalries. Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi learned D.P.G. opposed grant of the bail application and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and had instigated others to commit the crime. He relied upon the case of Mumaras v. The State (PLD 2009 SC 385). I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and have gone through the record. Case of Mamaras (Supra) is clearly distinguishable. In that case the factual contest was that a public transport vehicle was ambushed by unknown assailants who had come in a motor car and as result of in discriminate firing nine persons had lost their lives. In that case two real brothers were facing trial who asked their third brother to kill one of the star witness and consequently the murder was committed on such instigation. It was in that context that this role was held to disentitle him to grant of bail. The present case is of typical local rivalries and dictum of Supreme Court in case of Abdul Rehman v. Javed and 2 others (2002 SCMR 1415) wherein the applicant had gone with intention to commit crime but had not fired is to the point. Consequently this bail application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail on his executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.300,000 (Rupees Three Lac) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. M.W.A./A-14/K Bail granted.