1997 P Cr (PLP)
MUREED HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1997 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUREED HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 P Cr (PLP) (MUREED HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Malik Muntazir Mehdi for Petitioner. Shahid Aleem for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/201/379/148/149
Accused was not found directly involved in the offence of murder during investigation by three Police Officers, but was found to have helped in concealing the dead body and prima facie he was liable only under S.201, P.P.C. punishable up to seven years' R.I.
Co-accused under similar circumstances had already been released on, bail
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner seeks bail in Case No.212 of 1994, registered at Police Station Rohallianwali, District Muzaffargarh under section 302/201/379/148/ 149, P.P.C. on the statement of Muhammad Bakhsh, brother of Muhammad Hashim allegedly killed by the petitioner and his accomplices. As narrated in the F.I.R. the facts are that the petitioner alongwith number of co-accused hired Taxi Car No.MNL-8198 driven by Muhammad Hashim, deceased, and took into Mouza Pirwala. It is stated that when the deceased did not return, search was made and ultimately the petitioner alongwith his accomplices admitted to have killed the deceased in order to misappropriate the taxi car. It is further stated that on the pointing out of the petitioner, the dead body was recovered. It is also claimed by the complainant that the accused promised to deliver the car but did not do so.
2. In support of the bail plea the learned counsel has referred to the order, dated 14-5-1995, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.651/B of 1995 by which Muhammad Arshad co-accused was released on bail. It is submitted that the case of the petitioner is not different from that of the released co-accused. The submission seems to be correct. It also transpires that the case was initially investigated by Abdul Sattar, S.H.O., who found that the petitioner and the released co-accused Muhammad Arshad were not directly involved in the killing but they have helped in concealing the dead body. This finding was agreed to by Ghulam Qadir, S.-I., Range Circle Dera Ghazi Khan, and by the S.P. Crime Branch, who supervised the investigation. It may be noted that the case was transferred from the local police on application of the complainant. In View of this tentative conclusion arrived at by at least three Police Officers, the only case against the petitioner is the one which falls under section 201, P.P.C. punishable up to seven years. In this view of the matter and keeping in view the release of the co-accused, this application is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Muzaffargarh. N.H.Q./M-302/L Bail allowed.