Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
2002 YLR 88

NIZAMUDDIN and 2 others vs THE STATE

Citation2002 YLR 88
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Criminal Bail Applications Nos.286 and S.619 Miscellaneous Application
Date2002-06-06
Judge(s)Zahid Kurban Alavi
ResultBail allowed

ORDER

1. ' This is a bail application filed on behalf of applicants/accused Nizamuddin, Bangui and Bachal who are involved in Crime No, 76 of 2001 of Police Dodapur for an offence under section 302/201, P.P.C..

2. ' Briefly the facts of the prosecution case are that one year back she-goats of applicant/accused Nizamuddin were stolen away for which one Kando was suspected and such F.I.R. In this connection was lodged as well. It is case, of prosecution that 4/5 months ago after finishing their private work, complainant, his brother Keewal, Kando and Zulfiqar were returning hack from Dodapur Town to their village when at about 6-00 a.m. At Bajejo Wah on Lal Shah Road, they were intercepted by accused Nizamuddin, Muhakumaddin, Shamasuddin alias Shamoon, Bachal Jumo and Bongul who asked Kando to come down from donkey cart, Kando went to them and the accused persons asked the complainant party to go their home. Kando did not turn up till next day, hence the complainant party approached Nizamuddin party who disclosed that Kando was freed after few moments on the very night. Then the complainant party continued searching for Kando on their own. On 7710-2001 at 17-00 hours, complainant along with his witnesses again approached the Nizamuddin Party with Holy Quran where all of accused were available in Otaq. The complainant party requested on Holy Quran to return Kando on which they admitted that Kando had committed their theft therefore he has been murdered and dead body has been disposed of. Therefore such F.I.R. Was lodged.

3. ' On 9-4-2002 the bail plea moved on behalf of the applicant/accused was declined by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jacobabad.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that there is inordinate delay of 4/5 months without plausible explanation, this is unseen incident, no recovery is effected from the applicants/accused and the body of the deceased has not been recovered, hence the charge of murder in the circumstances is not sustainable merely on suspicious and presumptions, which makes the case doubtful He further argued that on the face of it F.I.R. Is lodged as a counter case of first F.I.R. Lodged by applicant Nizamuddin in connection with theft of his she-goats. According to him this is case of further enquiry .

5. ' Faced with these arguments the learned counsel for the State in the circumstances, had no reasonable arguments to advance on behalf of the prosecution.

6. In view of the above discussion, I find that the case of the prosecution has become doubtful and calls for further enquiry, hence the applicants/accused are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs: 100,000 each and on executing a P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

7. ' Criminal Bail Application No: S-619 of 2002, stands disposed of along with listed applicants.

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