2009 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUR RAZAQ — Petitioner Versus RAB NAWAZ and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2009 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUR RAZAQ — Petitioner Versus RAB NAWAZ and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 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 2009 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUR RAZAQ — Petitioner Versus RAB NAWAZ and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Qasim Khan Khattak for Petitioner.
- Khawaja Muhammad Khan for Respondent No.1.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.324/34
Application for
Data available on the record showed that respondent/accused had been charged for firing a shot on the complainant, resulting in as many as five pellet injuries out of which one resulted in the fracture of his mandible
Intention to kill was not open to any doubt, when vital part of body of the complainant had been aimed at
Case for further inquiry could not be made out when accused, prima facie was saddled with the responsibility of attempting at the life of the complainant
Grant of bail, in the circumstances, would hardly be called for, even on the basis of a cross case, which was not a rule of universal application
Bail granted to accused was recalled and he was taken into custody.
Judgment & Decree
EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, J.
Petitioner through the instant petition seeks annulment of the order dated 27-4-2009 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karak at Takht-e-Nasrati whereby he granted post arrest bail to the accused-respondent Rab Nawaz in a case registered against him and two others under section 324/34, P.P.C. vide case F.I.R. No.33 dated 21-2-2009 in Police Station Takht-e-Nasrati District Karak.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that when accused-respondent has been charged for firing effective shot on the complainant resulting in the fracture of maundible, it was not a case for bail and that the order granting bail for being perverse, capricious, arbitrary and whimsical cannot be sustained.
3. As against that the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-respondent contended that in view of the cross case registered against the petitioner at the instance of the accused party, a case for further inquiry is made out and that the impugned order being based on proper appraisal of data on the record merits no interference.
4. I have gone through the available record carefully and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
5. According to the data available on the record the accused-respondent has been charged for firing a shot on the complainant resulting in as many as five pellet injuries out of which one resulted in the fracture of his mandible. Intention to kill is not open to any doubt at least at this stage when vital part of body appears to have been aimed at. How a case for further inquiry could be made out when the petitioner is, prima facie, saddled with the responsibility of attempting at the life of the complainant. Grant of bail in the circumstances of the case would hardly be called for, even on the basis of a cross case which is not a rule of universal application.
6. For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and the bail granted to the accused-respondent is recalled. He be taken into custody. However, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude his case within a period of two months positively, failing which the petitioner may, if so advised, repeat his petition for bail. H.B.T./176/P Application allowed.