YLRN 2018

2018 PLP 86 (YLRN)

HAQ NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.81980-B of 2017, decided on 31st October, 2017.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Sami Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2018 PLP 86 (YLRN)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Abdul Sami Khan, J
Parties HAQ NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 86 (YLRN)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2018 PLP 86 (YLRN)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Sami Khan, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP 86 (YLRN) (HAQ NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Sardar Imtiaz Ahmad Dogar for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324 & 337 F(iii)

Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, hurt

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Complainant alleged that accused fired at injured (brother of complainant) with pistol which landed on left thigh of the injured

Offence alleged did not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.

Accused did not repeat fire thus question regarding attraction of S.324, P.P.C. would be determined by Trial Court after recording evidence

Accused was behind the bars for nine months and was in jail without any fruitful progress towards his trial

Accused was previous non-convict and never involved in any other case of like nature

Investigation of the case was complete and accused was no more required for further investigation

Offence alleged was triable by Magistrate, S.30 who was competent to pass sentence for seven years only

Mere heinousness of offence was no ground to refuse concession of bail

Case of accused being one of further inquiry, bail was granted accordingly. [Para. 2 of the judgment] Muhammad Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor General and Nishan Ali S.I. with record.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner Haq Nawaz has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.46/2017 dated 19.01.2017 under sections 324, 337 F(III) PPC, registered at Police Station Saddar Sangla Hill District Nankana Sahib.

2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record of this case has also been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation is not allowed at this stage. The allegation against the petitioner is that he fired with his pistol .30 bore which landed on left thigh of Shahbaz brother of the complainant which injury was declared "Jurrah ghayrjaifah-Mutlahimah" under section 337 F(iii), P.P.C. which carry maximum punishment up to three years as Ta'zir. The petitioner has not repeated the fire. thus the question regarding attraction of section 324, P.P.C. shall be determined by the learned trial Court after recording prosecution evidence. Admittedly the petitioner was arrested in this case on 31.01.2017, since then he is in jail without any fruitful progress towards his trial. Nobody can be kept in all for an indefinite period. Admittedly the petitioner is previous non-convict and never involved in any other case of such like nature. The investigation of the case is complete and the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. The offence with which the petitioner is charged is triable by Magistrate Section 30 who is competent to pass sentence for seven years only. Mere heinousness of offence is no ground to refuse the concession of bail to an accused, who otherwise, becomes entitled for concession of bail on the merits of the case. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars.

3. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry covered by sub-section (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only. WA/H-16/L Bail granted.