NAUSHER and another vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a criminal miscellaneous application seeking post-arrest bail on behalf of the petitioners, Nausher and another, in a criminal case. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to bail in view of the delay in lodging the First Information Report, the alleged discrepancy in weapon recovery, and the specific roles attributed. The court holds that the petitioners were named in the First Information Report, were armed with deadly weapons, and inflicted numerous injuries upon the injured prosecution witness, bringing the case within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the court finds no sufficient grounds for granting bail and dismisses the petition.
- Whether delay of two days in lodging the First Information Report constitutes a sufficient ground for post-arrest bail?
- Does a discrepancy between the weapon mentioned in the First Information Report and the weapon recovered make the case one of further inquiry?
- Are accused persons alleged to have caused numerous injuries with deadly weapons falling within the prohibitory clause entitled to bail?
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Report summoned from the trial Court has not been received. In the earlier part of the clay learned counsel for the petitioners had made submissions and left the Court with permission as he had to conduct a trial at Chunian. He had submitted that there is delay of 2 days in lodging the F.I.R.
With no specific roles to the petitioners. He further submitted that according to F.I.R., the petitioners were armed with hatchets but Kassis have been recovered from them so it is a case of further inquiry.
8. Learned counsel for the State submits that both the petitioners are named in the F.I.R., hatchet was recovered from Nausher while Kassi was recovered from Nawaz, petitioner, in all there were 13 injuries on the person of the injured P.W., nine with sharp edge while four with blunt weapon and that despite direction of this Court legible copy of the MLR has not been placed on record.
9. Both the petitioners armed with deadly weapons caused numerous injuries on the person of injured P.W. Offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. No ground for bail.
Dismissed.