1994 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD TUFAIL — Petitioner Versus NASIR MAHMOOD and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD TUFAIL — Petitioner Versus NASIR MAHMOOD and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) 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) (MUHAMMAD TUFAIL — Petitioner Versus NASIR MAHMOOD and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rafique Ahmad Bajwa for Petitioner.
- Abdul Basit for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Cancellation of bail-- Section 497(5), Cr.P.C. empowers the High Court to cancel bail granted by the Court of Session even if no such application is moved before the Trial Court in the first instance.
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Cancellation of bail-- Ground that accused had been found innocent during investigation no longer held the field as in the final result of investigation he had been found guilty-- Accused was named in the F.I.R. on an allegation of waylaying the deceased and firing at him alongwith his co-accused
Question whether the shot of accused hit the deceased or his motor-cycle was of no consequence-- Bail allowed to accused by Sessions Court was cancelled in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Malik Muhammad Mateen Khokhar, Bashir Ahmad Shaheen and Abdul Majid for the State. Date of hearing: 11th January, 1994. Muhammad Tufail, father of the deceased, has applied for cancellation of bail of Nasir Mahmood, Foot Constable, granted to him by the learned trial Court on 12-9-1993, in the case pertaining to the murder of Zaheer Iqbal deceased.
2. The prosecution case is that the respondent alongwith three others waylaid Zaheer Iqbal deceased while he was proceeding on a motor-cycle and fired at him which instead of hitting him, hit his motor-cycle, as a result of which it stopped. In the meantime, his co-accused fired a gunshot at the deceased, which proved fatal.
3. The motive for the offence was that about 15 years prior to the occurrence, a cousin of the respondent was murdered for which brothers of the deceased were suspected 2/3 days prior to the occurrence, the accused had made an attempt on his life by firing at him.
4. Nasir Mahmood respondent was granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the ground that he had been found innocent during investigation.
5. The cancellation is sought on the grounds that being vicariously liable, the respondent was not entitled to be released on bail. Furthermore, in the investigation conducted by Abdul Majid, D.S.P. Crimes, he was found guilty and was found to have interpolated the duty-register to show that on the relevant date, he was present on duty.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the application for cancellation cannot be moved in the High Court directly and the petitioner should move the trial Court, in the first instance. He has not been able to cite any case-law in support of his contention. Section 497, subsection (5), Cr.P.C. empowers the High Court to cancel bail granted by the Court of Sessions.
7. The ground on which the respondent was admitted to bail does not hold the field in view of the final result of the investigation carried out by Abdul Majid, D.S.P. Crimes. According to the D.S.P. Nazar Muhammad, A.S.I, with whom the respondent was attached, had reported his absence from duty on the relevant date.
8. The respondent is named in the F.I.R. with an allegation of waylaying the deceased. He alongwith his co-accused Munawar Hussain is alleged to have opened firing at the deceased. It is not material whether his shot hit the deceased or his motor-cycle. In the circumstances narrated above, he is not considered entitled to bail and accordingly, this application is accepted and his bail is cancelled. N.H.Q./M-1496/L Bail cancelled.