2009 PLP 2179 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 2179 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Iqbal Hameedur Rehman, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 2179 (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 2009 PLP 2179 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Iqbal Hameedur Rehman, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 2179 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. M. Lehrasib Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324, 337-F(vi) & 34
Accused was behind the bars for the last about one year and there was no progress in the trial of the case
Injury, caused by accused was on the non-vital part of the body of the victim and accused did not repeat the fire, while he could do so
Injury suffered by the victim fell within the purview of S.337-F(iii), P.P.C. which was punishable with DAMAN and could also be punished with imprisonment extending to three years as Tazir
Sentence of Tazir was awarded to the offenders who were previous convict, habitual or hardened, desperate or dangerous criminals; while the prosecution had not brought any material to show that accused suffered such attributes
Award of sentence of Tazir being a matter of further inquiry, case' of accused fell within the purview of further inquiry, entitling him to concession of bail
Co-accused had already been granted bail
Prima facie the intention to kill, did not appear to be available keeping in view the seat of injury, the fact that was on the non-vital part of the body and was no t repeated
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Ghulam Qadir Bari, Asstt. P.-G. and Yaqoob, A.S.-I. with record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
IQBAL HAMEEDUR REHMAN, J.
Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 67/2008 dated 3-8-2008 under sections 337-F(vi), 324, 34 P.P.C. registered at Police Station Miana Gondal, District Mandi Baha-ud-Din.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he while armed wish .30-bore Pistol caused fire-arm injury on Muhammad Imran on his left thigh.
3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last about one year; that the challan has been submitted before the learned trial Court but there is no progress in the trial; that the whole family has been involved in this case with mala fide intention; that no eye-witness was present at the spot and the story narrated by the complainant is concocted one. It is further stated that if the prosecution version as per F.I.R. is admitted, the case of the petitioner does not fall within the prohibitory clause. The maximum sentence of section 337-F(vi), P.P.C. is seven years and in such like cases grant of bail is a rule and refusal an exception. It is further stated that nothing was recovered from the petitioner and the alleged recovery has been planted with the connivance of the complainant party. It is further stated that the injury as per medico legal report is self-inflicted and is on the non-vital part of the body of the injured. It is further stated that the co-accused has already been granted bail.
4. Bail petition has been opposed by the learned Assistant Prosecutor-General on the ground that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R.; that the challan has been submitted in the Court and the motive is also alleged to the petitioner.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last about one year and there is no progress in the trial of the case. The injury caused by the petitioner is on the non-vital part of the body and the petitioner did not repeat the fire despite the fact to do so. The injury suffered by the victim falls within the purview of section 337-F(iii), P.P.C. which is punishable with DAMAN and may also be punished with imprisonment extending to three years as Tazir. The sentence of Tazir is awarded to the offenders who are previous convict, habitual or hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal and the prosecution has not brought any material to show that the accused/petitioner suffers such attributes; therefore, the case of, the petitioner becomes that of further inquiry. Regarding award of sentence of Tazir is a matter of further inquiry. Accused is behind the bars and the co-accused has already been granted bail. Prima facie the intention to kill does not appear to be available keeping in view the seat of injury, which is on the non-vital part of the body, and non-repetition.
7. In view of what has been discussed above, this bail, petition is allowed. The petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-483/L Bail granted.