PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Muneer Ahmed vs State Ss — 2025 YLR 1954 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 1954 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Muneer Ahmed vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 324; S. 497; Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

Muneer Ahmed VS State Ss. 497(2) & 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(i), 337-F(vi), 337-L(2), 147, 148 & 149---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, shajjah-i-khafifah, shajjah-i-mudihah, ghayr-jaifah-damiyah, munaqqilah, causing hurt, rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Pre-arrest bail, confirmation of---Further inquiry---Gist of allegations in FIR transpired that due to property dispute, accused-petitioners assaulted the complainant party, due to which two persons sustained injuries---No doubt the applicants were nominated in the F.I.R with specific role of causing injuries to witnesses---Injuries allegedly sustained by the injured witnesses were either on non-vital part of the body or carried lesser punishment---Injuries attributed to applicant "MA" that he allegedly caused lathi blow to injured on his head and chin were belied by the medical evidence as per medical certificate, the injuries so sustained by him on his chin was available only---Injury attributed to said applicant sustained on the head of injured was missing---None of accused had repeated the injury through which it could be deduced that they had not any intention to commit qatl-i-amd of the witnesses, hence application of S.324 P.P.C was yet to be determined by the trial Court after recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses---In the circumstances, when the parties were already on strained relations over landed property and the land claimed by the complainant party to be their own was in possession of the accused since 2007, therefore, agreement executed by father of the complainant party had not been denied---Mala fide on the part of prosecution could not be ruled out, thus case required further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) to S.497, Cr.P.C---Consequently, bail application was allowed and interim bail already granted to the applicants was confirmed.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English