2007 PLP 2832 (YLR)
MUKHTIAR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 2832 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J |
| Parties | MUKHTIAR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2832 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 2832 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2832 (YLR) (MUKHTIAR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Khalid Mehmood for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 322
No serious motive was attributed to the accused to do away with deceased
Accused was empty-handed at the relevant time and assault by accused and his co-accused upon deceased was a result of a sudden flare-up without any premeditation on their part
Nothing had been recovered from possession of accused during the investigation of the case
No specific injury to deceased was attributed to accused in F.I.R. which contained only a generalized and collective allegation against accused and co-accused
F.1. R. showed that accused and his co-accused had jointly and collectively given fist blows and slaps to deceased on his face after throwing him on the ground, but post-mortem examination report pertaining to dead body, had shown that deceased had sustained only two abrasions, one of which was on his hand and other on his knee joint and that deceased had sustained no injury on his face at all
Investigating Officer, had pointed out in his case-diary that case did not attract provisions of 5:302, P. P. C., but same attracted an offence under 5.322, P.P.C. and offence under S. 322, P.P.C. did not carry any sentence of imprisonment
Challan had been submitted in connection with the case and accused was languishing in judicial lock-up and his physical custody was not required by the police for the purposes of investigation
Case against accused calling for further inquiry into his guilt. within the purview of subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C. he was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Mian Bashir Ahmad Bhatti, Deputy Prosecutor-General for the State. Sardar Tanvir Hayder Buzdar for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.--Through this petition Mukhtiar Hussain Shah petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.263 registered at Police Station Shah Jamal, District Muzaffargarh on 1-8-2006 in respect of an offence under section 302, P.P.C. During the investigation it has already been opined by the police that instead of section 302, P.P.C. the offence attracted in this case is one under section 322, P.P.C. read with section 34,P.P.C.
2. A perusal of the F.I.R. shows that there was no serious motive on the part of the petitioner to do away with the deceased. Admittedly the petitioner was empty-handed at the relevant time and an assault by the petitioner and his co-accused upon the deceased was a result of a sudden flare-up without any premeditation on their part. Nothing had been recovered from the petitioner's possession during the investigation of this case. No specific injury to the deceased stands attributed to the petitioner in the F.I.R. which contains only a generalized and collective allegation against the petitioner and his co-accused. It is of critical importance to mention here that according to the F.I.R. the petitioner and his two accused had jointly and collectively given fist blows and slaps to the deceased on his face after felling him on the ground but the Post-mortem Examination Report pertaining to the dead body shows that the deceased had sustained only two abrasions one of which was on his hand and other was on his right knee-joint and that the deceased had sustained no injury on his face at all. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in his case-diary No.5 dated 9-8-2006 the Investigating Officer had expressly observed that the case in hand did not attract the provisions of section 302, P.P.C. but the same attracted an offence under section 322, P.P.C. read with section 34, P.P.C. An offence under section 322, P.P.C. does not carry any sentence of imprisonment. It is admitted at all hands that so far no challan has been submitted in connection with the present case. The petitioner is languishing in Judicial lock-up and his physical custody is not required by the police at this stage for the purposes of investigation.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition -is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-76/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.