1998 PLP 217 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SHAHID ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 217 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian, Saleem Akhtar and Mukhtar Ahmad Junejo, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAHID ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 217 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 217 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Ajmal Mian, Saleem Akhtar and Mukhtar Ahmad Junejo, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 217 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SHAHID ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 18th December, 1995.
- S. Zawwar Hussain Jafri, Assistant Advocate-General, Sindh for the State
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that there was no eye-witness of the incident except complainant Muhammad Ashfaq, that neither the complainant nor anybody else was injured, that the evidence of recovery was of no use as the pistol in question was not sent to the ballistic expert, and that the F.I.R. was delayed as it was lodged at 4-25 p.m. Mr. Zawwar Hussain, learned Assistant Advocate-General Sindh appearing in consequence of notice issued to the Advocate-General, opposed the application for bail. Learned Assistant Advocate-General conceded that no injure- was caused to the complainant but argued that an attempt was made at his life and hence the offence punishable under section 324 of P.P.C. amended by the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, was made out. Learned Assistant Advocate-General could not explain delay in lodging of the F.I.R. except that the complainant was scared of the petitioner and his brother and their party.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 15‑11‑1995 of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi in Cr. Bail Application No. 1167 of 1995). ‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 324‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Bail‑‑‑Complainant had not pinpointed in the F.I.R. whether 4/5 ineffective shots were fired at him by the accused or his co- accused‑‑‑Despite the incident having taken place outside the house of the complainant in broad daylight, no eye‑witness was cited‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and the accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. S. Zawwar Hussain Jafri, Assistant Advocate‑General, Sindh for the State
Judgment & Decree
MUKHTAR AHMAD JUNEJO, J.
Petitioner Muhammad Shahid has sought leave to appeal against a judgment by the High Court of Sindh dismissing his Criminal Bail Application No. 1167 of 1995. . Case against the petitioner was registered by Brigade Police Karachi East under F.I.R. No.170 of 1995 on complaint of Muhammad Ashfaq lodged on 17-8-1995 at 4-25 p.m. Muhammad Ashfaq alleged that on 17-8-1995 at 8.00 or 9.00 a.m. he was in his house, when the petitioner and his brother Sajid called him out and demanded from him Rs.1,000 per month as "Chanda" for a political party and that on his refusal to pay the "Chanda", he was threatened of being killed and was fired at 4/5 shots, but he avoided the shots by rushing in his house and closing the door. Police registered the case and took over investigation. The petitioner was arrested but not Sajid. The case was challenged in the Special Court (S.T.A.), Karachi. Petitioner's bail prayer was rejected by the trial Court on 9-10-1995 and was rejected by the High Court of Sindh on 15-11-1995. Hence this petition for leave to appeal. Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that there was no eye-witness of the incident except complainant Muhammad Ashfaq, that neither the complainant nor anybody else was injured, that the evidence of recovery was of no use as the pistol in question was not sent to the ballistic expert, and that the F.I.R. was delayed as it was lodged at 4-25 p.m. Mr. Zawwar Hussain, learned Assistant Advocate-General Sindh appearing in consequence of notice issued to the Advocate-General, opposed the application for bail. Learned Assistant Advocate-General conceded that no injure- was caused to the complainant but argued that an attempt was made at his life and hence the offence punishable under section 324 of P.P.C. amended by the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, was made out. Learned Assistant Advocate-General could not explain delay in lodging of the F.I.R. except that the complainant was scared of the petitioner and his brother and their party. In the F.I.R. it has not been pinpointed whether 4/5 shots were fired at the complainant by the petitioner or by Sajid. The incident took place outside the house of the complainant behind German Hotel. Jacob Line, Karachi during broad daylight and yet no person was cited as eye-witness. On the tentative assessment of the evidence collected by the police, we are of the view that this is I a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. Consequently, this petition is converted into appeal and, allowed and appellant Muhammad Shahid is granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./M-35/S Petition allowed.