1992 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUL REHMAN SHAHID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J |
| Parties | ABDUL REHMAN SHAHID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 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 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUL REHMAN SHAHID‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hamid Ullah Khan for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Drugs Act (XXXI of 1976), S:23/27‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.411‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Prosecution had not been able to give a clue as to how the accused came in possession of allegedly stolen and unregistered Government medicines‑‑‑Case against accused, thus, was made out of further inquiry‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Rana Muhammad Arif, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Rana Muhammad Arif, A.A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1991. Petitioner has been arrested in case F.I.R. No. 119/91, dated 17‑9‑1991, Police Station Lohari Gate under section 23/27, Drugs Act, 1976 read with section 411, P.P.C. He has moved this Court for grant of bail directly on the ground that the Drugs Court is not functioning these days.
2. Muhammad Yunus, Partner of Lahore Medicine Co., 19‑Muslim Masjid, Outside Lohari Gate, Lahore informed ‑the Drugs Inspector that Abdul Rehman Shahid had come to his shop to sell stolen Government medicines, some of which were unregistered also Drugs Inspector reached there. He took into possession the medicines, caught the petitioner and got the case registered.
3. The case of the petitioner is th4t he had gone to the shop to purchase the medicines, but the Proprietor/Salesman refused to issue warranty as he was selling unregistered medicines as well as medicines which he could not be lawfully in possession of.
4. The S.H.O. on the direction of this Court had gone to Bahawalnagar None, from Government hospitals there, reported to him that any medicines had been stolen from there. There was no factory either in Bahawalnagar where unregistered medicines were being manufactured. As the prosecution has not been able to give a clue as to how the petitioner came in possession of the medicines? a case of further enquiry stands made out. The petition is; therefore, allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond, in the sum of Rs.25,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to‑the satisfaction of Registrar, Drugs Court, Lahore. N.H.Q./A‑89/L Bail granted.