2006 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD QASIM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD QASIM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 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 2006 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD QASIM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860). S.302
Besides accused, three co-accused were also nominated in the case, but all said co-accused were let off by the police, although allegation of causing fatal fire-arm injury was attributed to one of said co-accused
Sufficient circumstances existed to assume that investigation was conducted in a perverse and partial manner
Bail application was rejected and the Trial Court was directed to summon persons who had been nominated in F.I.R., but were let off by the police and to proceed with the case in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J.
The applicant is involved in F.I.R. No.2 of 2004, registered on the complaint of Jaro at Police Station K.T. Jatoi, District Dadu on the accusation of causing murder of Ali Nawaz. It is contended that besides the present applicant co-accused Shoukat, Barkat and Roshan Ali were nominated in the F.I.R. but all the other three accused persons were let off by the police. The allegation of causing fatal fire-arm injury was attributed to Shoukat Ali. Learned State Counsel has conceded that the case has been badly handled by the Investigating Officer and it seems that he has conducted the investigation in a partial manner. The contentions raised have been considered and material placed on record has been perused. Indeed there are sufficient circumstances to assume that the case was mishandled, and the investigation was conducted in a perverse and capricious manner. I, therefore, agree with the view expressed by learned State Counsel. While rejecting the bail application of the present applicant I would direct the trial Court to summon the persons who had been nominated in the F.I.R. but were let off by the police, and proceed with the case in accordance with the law. H.B.T./M-53/K??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail application rejected.