NAME
OF THE COURT AND JUDGE
Ladda Vs. The
State.
Post
Arrest Bail Application No.000-0 of 0000.
FIR No.000,
dated 00.00.0000.
Offence
u/s 109, 302, 429, 148, 149 of PPC.
P.S. ABC
ORDER
Briefly
instant FIR was lodged as per statement of complainant (name) on the ground that on 11.09.0000 at 4.30 p.m
petitioner along with his co-accused while armed with weapons in prosecution of
common object formed an unlawful assembly and committed the Qatl-i-Amd (murder)
of Gurya , nephew of complainant.
2. Learned
counsel for accused/petitioner has argued that story of FIR is false, frivolous
and concocted one; that there is accusation of joint firing by the accused;
that as per story of FIR no injury upon the person of deceased is attributed to
petitioner; that nothing was recovered from the petitioner and false recovery
has been planted against him. It is also argued that petitioner is in the
judicial lockup and since investigation of the case is complete so his person
is no more required for investigation, hence, he may be admitted to bail.
3. Learned
Prosecutor for the State assisted by
learned counsel for complainant has contested the bail application during
arguments and alleged that petitioner is nominated in FIR and deeper
appreciation of material is not required at bail stage. Learned counsel for
complainant while placing reliance on 2009 M L D 1106 prayed for dismissal of instant bail petition.
4. Arguments
heard. Record perused.
5. Perusal
of record shows that petitioner is nominated in the FIR. It is alleged in the
FIR that petitioner was present at the spot at the time of alleged occurrence
while armed with Kalashnikov and his presence with co-accused at the time of
occurrence very much facilitated the commission of offence. Sharing of common intention
of the petitioner is very much apparent who also resorted to indiscriminate
firing resulting into death of a calf. He after the registration of case did
not bother to join the investigation rather remained absconder. During the
course of investigation recovery of weapon of offence has also been effected
from him. Trial against the petitioner/ accused has commenced and now the case
is fixed for evidence of prosecution. In this view of the matter petitioner is
not entitled to the concession of bail. Resultantly this post arrest bail
application of petitioner is dismissed.
6. Record of
this petition be annexed with the file of challan case.
Announced:
Date
Judge
No comments:
Post a Comment