Form No: HCJD/C-121

ORDER SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17471-B of 2012

Mehboob alias Booba

Petitioner
versus

The State and another

Respondents

S. No. of Date of order/ Order with signature of Judge, and that of

order/ Proceeding parties or counsel, where necessary
Proceeding

02) 11.12.2012 Mr. Waseem Qaiser, Advocate for the

petitioner.
Mr. Nisar Ahmad Virk, Deputy Prosecutor-
General for the State and Zulfiqar Naul, SI
with record.

Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C.

Mehboob alias Booba petitioner has sought bail after

arrest in case FIR No. 173/12, dated 18.06.2012 registered

at Police Station Sandal Bar, District Faisalabad for

offences under sections 337-F(i)/337-L(2)/ 302/ 365/ 148/

149/109, PPC.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that

the petitioner is innocent and he has been roped in this

case by the complainant with mala fide intention and

ulterior motive after joining hands with the local police.

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17471-B of 2012 2

The main accused Jameel who has been attributed fatal

shot to the deceased has been declared innocent during the

investigation of this case. Other three co-accused of the

petitioner namely Boota, Aslam and Tariq with the same

roles have also been declared innocent. In these

circumstances the story narrated in the FIR become

doubtful. The petitioner has not caused any injury to the

deceased. He has also not caused firearm injury to any

PW. The injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in

nature. Heinousness of offence is no ground to refuse bail

especially when the recovery of weapon of offence is

planted upon the petitioner. It is settled law that vicarious

liability of the petitioner is to be determined by the

learned trial court after recording evidence. The petitioner

was arrested in this case on 28.07.2012 and he is still

behind the bars. The investigation qua the petitioner has

already been completed and his continuous incarceration

in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.

3. On the other hand the learned Deputy Prosecutor-

General after going through the record opposes this bail

petition on the grounds that the petitioner is duly named in

the FIR and specific role of causing hurt to the injured PW

is attributed to him therein. The role attributed to the

petitioner is also borne out from the Medico-legal

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17471-B of 2012 3

Certificate of the victims. Two persons have lost their

lives and the offence with which the petitioner is charged

falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

During investigation the petitioner has been found

involved in this case by the investigating officer.

Recovery has been effected from the petitioner. There is

ample evidence against the petitioner in shape of

statements of witnesses recorded under section 161,

Cr.P.C. Challan in this case has been submitted and if the

petitioner is allowed bail at this stage the case of the

prosecution would be prejudice. There is absolutely no

malice on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate

the petitioner in this case.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties

and going through the record it has been noticed that no

injury to any of the deceased is attributed to the

petitioner. The petitioner alongwith his co-accused

allegedly inflicted injuries to injured PWs and no

specific injury is attributed to him. It is settled law that

vicarious liability of the petitioner is a question which

would be determined by the learned trial court at the

time of trial. The petitioner is previous non-convict, he

was arrested in this case on 28.07.2012, investigation is

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17471-B of 2012 4

complete, thus, continuous incarceration of the petitioner

in jail would not serve any useful purpose at this stage.

6. For what has been discussed above the case against

the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt

within the purview of sub-section (2) of section 497,

Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the

petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing

bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees on

hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the

like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

(Abdul Sami Khan)

Judge
APPROVED FOR REPORTING

(Abdul Sami Khan)

Judge
*SHAHID*