Inamullah vs State.

2010 Y L R 1476

[Peshawar]

Before Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, J

INAM ULLAH---Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE and another---Respondents

Criminal Miscellaneous (BA) No.1794 of 2009, decided on 23rd November, 2009.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324---Qatl-e-amd and attempt to commit qatl-i- amd---Bail, refusal of---Record had reflected that single accused had been charged for effectively firing at deceased and injured who also died later on---Motive for the occurrence was on record---Three empties of pistol and blood were also recovered from the spot and witnessed by one, which for the purpose of bail was sufficient to prima facie connect accused with the commission of offence---Certain questions raised by accused could not be considered at bail stage as consideration of such questions required deeper appreciation of evidence, which was not permissible in the bail matters---For the purpose of bail only tentative assessment of the material available on the record had to be considered---Sufficient material was available on record connecting accused with the commission of offence which had disentitled accused to concession of bail---Bail petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Shah Faisal Khan for Petitioner.

Arbab Aziz Ahmad for the State.

Zahid Yousaf Qureshi, A.A.-G.

Date of hearing: 23rd November, 2009.

JUDGMENT

MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.---The accused/petitioner seeks his release on bail in case F.I.R. No.515 dated 15-8-2009 registered under sections 302/324, P.P.C. Police Station, Badaber, Peshawar whereby he was charged for firing on the father of complainant namely Rahat Gul through his pistol, in the result of which said Rahat Gul and one Hamid Khan cart vendor present on the spot in connection with his business, were hit and his father Rahat Gul succumbed to the injuries on his way to the hospital. The said occurrence was witnessed by Sehr Gul. The motive for the offence was a dispute over property.

2.Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant were heard. Record perused, which reflect that the single accused/petitioner has been charged for effectively firing at Rahat Gul then injured (and died later on) and one Hamid Khan. Motive for the occurrence is there, three empties of pistol and blood were also recovered from the spot and witnessed by one Sehr Gul which for the purpose of bail is sufficient to prima facie connect the accused/petitioner with the commission of the offence. The learned counsel for the accused/petitioner have raised certain points that when the injured were taken to the Hospital, report was not lodged there which reflect that the complainant at the time of occurrence was not present, the statement of witness Sehr Gul was recorded at belated stage and the other shopkeepers near the spot were not examined by the Investigating Officer are the questions consideration of which amount to deeper appreciation of evidence which is not permissible in bail matters. For the purpose of bail, only tentative assessment of the material available on the record has to be considered.

3.So in the circumstances, there is sufficient material available on record connecting the accused/petitioner with the commission of offence which disentitles him to the concession of bail at this stage, hence, this petition being meritless is dismissed.

H.B.T/92/P Bail granted.