1994 P Cr (PLP)
NOWSHER — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NOWSHER — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 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: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (NOWSHER — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Zafrullah Cheema for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/324/337-A(iii)/148/149/379-- Bail, grant of
Accused was named in the F.I.R.
Two persons had lost their lives in the incident
Weapon of offence had been recovered from the accused
Case of co-accused who had been released on bail was on different footing
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered against him and others with Police Station Chak Jhumra, for an offence under sections 302/324, 337-A(iii)/148/149/379, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. dated 12-6-1992. The case was got registered by Sharah, with the allegation that on the fateful day at about 12-30 day time, after Ourbani he went to the Dera. The first informant heard commotion and went there and saw Muhammad Khan co-accused armed with hatchet giving blows to Dost Muhammad on his head who fell down. The witnesses tried to separate them whereupon Alam Sher armed with hatchet raised Lalkara that the revenge for the disgrace of Mst. Bashiran Bibi be taken. Petitioner is alleged to have given injuries to Rehmat Bibi with wrong side of his hatchet.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is ascribed only simple injuries. Ahmad Ali armed, with three co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Mulazam Hussain, Said Ahmad and Umer Hayat, have already been released on bail and the case of the petitioner is at par therefore, he should also be given the same concession. Argued that it has been more than a year yet the trial has not commenced. Contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State.
3. I have heard the learned counsel at length and gone through the file. Petitioner is named in the F.I.R. In this incident two persons namely, Dost Muhammad and Ashiq Hussain lost their lives. Weapon of offence has also been recovered from the petitioner. The case of the co-accused, who have been released on bail, is on different footing. Two of them were not ascribed any injuries to anyone. The third was ascribed an injury which was not found in the medico-legal examination. The injuries caused by the petitioner were considered by the doctor who examined Rehntat Bibi. No ground for bail at this stage is made out. Petition fails which is dismissed. N.H.Q./N-203/L Bail refused