2017 PLP 320 (YLRN)
MUHAMMAD ATIQ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 PLP 320 (YLRN) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) |
| Bench Members | Abdul Sami Khan, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ATIQ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 PLP 320 (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 2017 PLP 320 (YLRN)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) 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: 2017 PLP 320 (YLRN) (MUHAMMAD ATIQ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Fakhar Haider Kazmi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 337-F(i), 34, 336, 337-A(i), 337-U(i) & 337-N(2)
Causing Damihah, common intention, Itlaf-i-Salahiyyat-i-Udw causing Shajjah-i-Khafifah, arsh for teeth, awarding tazir
Case being of bail after arrest, deeper appreciation, was not allowed
Accused having been attributed the role of causing injury on the mouth of complainant, due to which one tooth of the complainant was broken, case of accused fell under S.336, P.P.C.; punishment thereof would be one-twentieth of the Diyat under S.337-U(1), P.P.C.
Was yet to be determined at the trial, as to under which provision of sections, and as to what punishment, accused was liable to, even if the case of the prosecution as set forth, was proved
Remaining offences under Ss.337-F(i) & 337-A(i), P.P.C. were bailable in nature
Accused was previous non-convict and never involved in any other case of like nature
Accused was neither hardened, dangerous, desperate criminal; nor he had committed the alleged offence on the pretext of honour
Section 337-N(2), P.P.C., would come to the rescue of accused
Accused remained on physical remand with the Police, but nothing had been recovered from him
Vicarious liability of accused would be determined by the Trial Court after recording evidence
Accused was behind the bars since 30-12-2011; investigation of the case was complete and accused was no more required for further investigation
Case of accused having become one of further inquiry covered under S.497(2), Cr.P.C., accused was granted bail, in circumstances. [Para. 2 & 3 of the judgment]
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.
Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.1247/2015 dated 29.12.2015 under sections 337-F(i), 34, 336, 337-A(i) P.P.C., registered at Police Station Airport Rawalpindi.
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. As per FIR the present petitioner has been attributed the role of causing injury with knuckleduster on the mouth of complainant due to which one tooth of the complainant was broken. It has been taken notice of, as a perusal of FIR in question has established, that the main offence, alleged, is under the provisions of section 336, P.P.C. which is as follows:-- "
336. Whoever, by doing any act with the intention of causing hurt to any person, or with the knowledge that he is likely to cause hurt to any person, causes itlaf-i-salahiyyat-i-udw of any person, shall, in consultation with the authorised medical officer, be punished with qisas and if the qisas is not executable, keeping in view the principles of equality in accordance with the Injunctions of Islam, the offender shall be liable to arsh and may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years as taz'ir" It has further been noticed that the injury attributed to the petitioner is in respect of breaking a tooth of the complainant/ injured, the punishment thereof has been specifically stated in section 337-U(1) as follows:-- 337-U(1) The Arsh for causing Itlaf of a tooth, other than a milk tooth, shall be one-twentieth of the Diyat. " It is yet to be determined at the trial as to under which provision of the sections stated above, and as to what punishment the petitioner is liable of, even if the case of the prosecution as set forth, is proved. The remaining offences under sections 337-F(i), 337-A(i), P.P.C. are bailable in nature. Admittedly the petitioner is previous non-convict and never involved in any other case of such like nature. He is neither hardened, dangerous, desperate criminal nor he has committed the alleged offence on the pretext of honour, therefore, section 337N(2), P.P.C. comes to the rescue of the petitioner. The present petitioner remained on physical remand with the police but nothing has been recovered from him. It is settled law that vicarious liability of the accused shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. He is behind the bars since 30.12.2015. Investigation of the case is complete and the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. His further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose.
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. HBT/M-83/L Bail granted.