Pakistan Case Law← Search
2016 SCMR 2094, NLR 2016 Criminal 542

MUHAMMAD ASLAM, ETC. vs THE STATE, ETC

Citation2016 SCMR 2094, NLR 2016 Criminal 542
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Crl. Petition No, 538-L of 2016
Date2016-06-28
Judge(s)Amir Hani Muslim, Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Umar Ata Bandial
ResultHigh Court Order Upheld/Leave to Appeal Refused.

ORDER

MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Petitioners seek bail after arrest in case FIR No, 51, dated 16.2.2015, offence under sections 302, 148, 149, PPC, registered at P.S. Saddar, District Bhakkar.

2. Precise allegation against the petitioners, as per the FIR, is that they alongwith their co-accused, while armed with pistols .30 bore attacked the complainant party. Co-accused Abid Hussain raised lalkara to avenge the murder of his brother and fired multiple shots which hit the deceased Nazir Hussain @ Papu on various parts of his body. The fire shot by petitioner No, 1 Muhammad Aslam hit the deceased on his ribs on the right side whereas the fire shot by petitioner No, 2 Khizar Abbas hit the deceased on his left cheek.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for respondent No, 2, learned Law Officer and perusing the available record with their assistance, it has been noted by us that petitioners are specifically named in the FIR. Specific role of firing at the deceased has been assigned to them. The petitioners, as confirmed by the learned Law Officer, remained fugitive from law for about 8 months. In the circumstances, the police opinion regarding their absence at the time of occurrence has not found by us to be based on solid reasons. Even otherwise, it is for the learned Trial Court to determine after recording evidence pro and contra as to whether the petitioners were present at the spot at the time of unfortunate incident or not. The trial of the case has already commenced and statements of some of the prosecution witnesses have since been recorded. In the circumstance, we are of the view that petitioners have not been able to make out a case for grant of bail.

4. For the foregoing reasons, this petition having no merit is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search