01/10/2022
اگر للکارا مارنے والا ملزم اپنے ھمراھی ملزمان پر اثر انداز ھونے کی حیثیت رکھتا ھو اور اسکےللکارنے پر ھمراھی ملزمان نے یا ملزم نے قتل کا ارتکاب کیا ھو تو ایسا للکارا مارنے والا ملزم ضمانت کا حقدار نہ ھے۔
للکارا اور اسکے اثر1ت کے موضوع پر انتہائی اہم فیصلہ
2021 PCrLJ 47
Generally, a person burdened with the allegation of shouting lalkara is granted post-arrest bail but this is not an inflexible rule on the subject. For a just decision of post arrest bail in such cases, the Court has to tentatively see the background in which a perpetrator shouts lalkara, his interest in the crime and the quantum of influence which he can exert upon his co-assailants. From this material, the Court can draw an opinion about the existence or non-existence of reasonable grounds in terms of section 497 (1) Cr.P.C. so as to decide the bail plea of such an accused. If it arises from the record that the accused shouting lalkara had some deep-rooted interest in crime and was in a position to influence his co-accused so as to control his aggression, the concession of post-arrest bail can be withheld from him. It will also not be out of place to mention here that shouting of lalkara by a person in commanding and overwhelming position is a sufficient overt act towards the commission of crime. The expression “lalkara” stands for utterance of words by an overzealous accused at the crime scene, inciting others to commit an offence. Since the petitioner was in dominance over his co-accused, hence the lalkara raised by him can in no manner be treated as proverbial, rather it can best be defined as commanding in nature.
Despite being in a position of influence, petitioner made no effort to calm down the situation rather ignited it through an overzealous shouting of lalkara, culminating into the death of two real brothers.
Bail Dismissed
