Pakistan Case Law← Search
PLJ 2020 Cr.C. (Lahore) 753

Hafeez Ullah and 3 others vs State and another

CitationPLJ 2020 Cr.C. (Lahore) 753
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Crl. Misc. No. 340-B of 2020
Date2020-02-24
Judge(s)Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad
ResultBail confirmed?

ORDER

1. Through this petition, Hafeez-Ullah, Khalil, Salamat and Liaqat accused in case FIR No. 626/19, dated 25.09.2019 for the offences under Sections 386, 447/51 1, 337-F(i), 148, 149, PPC registered at Police Station City Jalalpur Pirwala District Multan seek pre-arrest bail.

2. Arguments heard and record perused.

3. FIR was registered on the complaint made by Riaz Hussain. As per FIR, petitioners duly armed alongwith co- accused 40-50 in number , forcibly entered into APV vehicle stand of which complainant was contractor . On complainant's refusal to pay an amount of Rs. 40,000/-, petitioners caused injuries on the person of complainant, and his nephews Muhammad Imran and Kamran. In investigation conducted by Deputy Superintendent of Police Regional Investigation Branch Multan, allegation of extortion was found doubtful. As per said report, both the parties were transporters but said fact was not disclosed in the FIR. Medicolegal reports of injured were challenged by petitioners/accused, whereupon re-examination of the injured was ordered but injured did not appear before District Standing Medical Board, due-to which they could not be re-examined, which fact is evident from copy of report of District Standing Medical Board dated 02.12.2019. During arguments learned counsel for complainant pointed out that the injured appeared before Medical Board on 12.02.2020 and now report is awaited.

4. In this regard, it is pointed out that injuries as declared in the Medicolegal reports of injured are not of the nature that the same could be re-examined with exactitude at this belated stage. Non-appearance of injured before District Standing Medical Board at relevant time, prima faci e indicates mala fide on the part of complainant party .

4. Above discussion shows that true facts of the case have not been disclosed in the FIR. Therefore, guilt of the petitioners needs further probe and their case calls for further inquiry . For the reasons recorded above, petition in hand is allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to petitioners is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

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