1986 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD FARYAD Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Akram, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD FARYAD Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Qurban Sadiq Akram, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD FARYAD Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Insaf Bhatti for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 29th September, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497(2)‑‑Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art. 4‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Forty packets allegedly containing Heroin recovered from petitioner yet it was not clear whether Heroin from each packet was sent for chemical analysis or not‑‑Case, held, was of further inquiry, in circumstances‑‑Petitioner allowed bail. Tasaddaq Hussain Gillani with Asstt. A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497(2)‑‑Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art. 4‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Forty packets allegedly containing Heroin recovered from petitioner yet it was not clear whether Heroin from each packet was sent for chemical analysis or not‑‑Case, held, was of further inquiry, in circumstances‑‑Petitioner allowed bail. Insaf Bhatti for Petitioner. Tasaddaq Hussain Gillani with Asstt. A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing: 29th September, 1985. It is alleged that 40 packet of Heroin, each containing one gram, were recovered from the petitioner on 18‑3‑1985, at 2‑30 p.m. by a raiding party organised by Muhammad Ashraf, Excise Inspector.
2. It is contended that the sample for chemical analysis was not taken from all the 40 packets and as such, even if there was a positive report from the Chemical Examiner, it could not be said that the 40 packets contained Heroin. According to the prosecution, five grams if Heroin was sent out of these 40 packets besides one packet which eras purchased by Khalid Mahmood decoy purchaser. It is not clear Whether Heroin, from each packet was sent for chemical analysis. I therefore, A find the case of the petitioner to be that of further inquiry. He is allowed bail on furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000 (Rupees five thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate. Multan. S.G.D. Bail granted.