Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2009 YLR 1796

CHANWAIZ KHAN vs CHANGRIAZ KHAN and 3 others

Citation2009 YLR 1796
CourtPeshawar High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No, 420 of 2008
Date2009-06-08
Judge(s)Ghulam Mohiuddin Malik
ResultApplication dismissed

' GHULAM MOHYUDDIN MALIK, J.---This is an application for cancellation of bail, in case F.I.R. No, 41 dated 30-4-2008 charge under section 324/34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Nara Abbottabad, granted to accused-respondents by the learned A.S.J-I, Abbottabad vide order dated 16-10-2008.

2. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the State counsel and counsel for the accused-respondents and have perused the record.

3. No doubt the accused-respondents are directly charged in the F.I.R. For attempting at the lives of complainant party by firing at them with their respective weapons and the shot fired by Parvez hit Mst. Hafizun Nisa on wrist but the fact remains that in the site-plan, the distance between the accused and the complainant is about 80 paces. The accused are shown outside the house whereas the victim in the Courtyard. The question that when four persons were firing simultaneously at the complainant party how could one say that the fire of Parvez hit the lady.

Moreover, she was wounded on non-vital part of the body, the firing was made from a considerable distance, so the question whether intention to commit Qatl-i-Amd of the lady exists on the part of accused. The maxim "Actus non facit reum, nisimens sit rea, (the intention and act must both concur to constitute the crime). It means, no one can be guilty of a crime without the will and intention of his mind. The attending facts of the case suggest that for determination of intention of accused recording of prosecution evidence at the trial is necessary. Lastly, the accused-respondents are on bail for the last about 7 months, there is no allegation that they had misused the liberty by tampering with the prosecution evidence or there is apprehension of their abscondence. Complete challan has been submitted in the Court for trial and as such final decision is in sight, therefore, in these circumstances cancellation of bail would serve no useful purpose.

4. For the foregoing reasons, this application being meritless stands dismissed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch