MLD 2006

2006 PLP 1041 (MLD)

AHMAD KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2005-December-21
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 1041 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties AHMAD KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
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 2006 PLP 1041 (MLD)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1041 (MLD)?

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: 2006 PLP 1041 (MLD) (AHMAD KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Muhammad Sher Cheema for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 498

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.452, 337-A(i), 337-A (ii), 337-L(2), 147 & 149

Pre-arrest bail

No mala fide had been alleged against complainant party or the police

Application moved before Addl. Sessions Judge, for grant of pre-arrest bail, also did not contain any such allegation

Petitioners/accused as per allegation had acted in a very cruel manner and caused various injuries to complainant party

Offences charged with, though did not attract prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C., but that fact alone, would not entitle accused to grant of pre-arrest bail, which was an extraordinary concession

One of accused persons appeared to be a frail and fragile man of seventy years and only role attributed to him, was that of raising Lalkara; his complicity in the case called for further probe

Petition to the extent of said accused was accepted and interim pre-arrest bail granted to him, was confirmed

Petition to the extent of other two accused persons was dismissed and order allowing pre-arrest bail to them, was withdrawn.

Judgment & Decree

M. BILAL KHAN, J.

Ahmad Khan son of Muhammad Din, Khadim Ali son of Ahmad Khan and Shahid son of Khadim Ali, the petitioners, seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.129 of 2005 dated 25-10-2005, registered at Police Station Begowala, District Sialkot, for offences under sections 452, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-L(2), 147, 149, P.P.C.

2. The allegation against the petitioners and their co-accused (since absconding) was that they in consultation with each other while armed with Pandas trespassed into the house of the complainant and raising Lalkara by Ahmad Khan petitioner they caused injuries to the complainant party. Resultantly the instant F.I.R. had been recorded.

3. The petitioners applied for their pre-arrest bail, however, their application had been turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska, District Sialkot, vide order dated 23-11-2005. Hence this petition.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

5. It has straightaway been observed that no mala fide has been alleged against the complainant party or the police. The application moved before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, for the grant of pre-arrest bail also did not contain any such allegation. The petitioners as per the allegations acted in a very cruel manner and caused various injuries to the complainant party. Although the offences charged with do not attract the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. yet this fact alone does not entitle them to the grant of pre-arrest bail which is an extraordinary concession. Ahmad Khan petitioner appears to be a frail and fragile man of seventy years and the only role attributed to him is that of raising Lalkara. His complicity in this case calls for further probe. Resultantly this petition to the extent of Ahmad Khan (petitioner No.1) is accepted and the interim pre-arrest bail granted to him vide order dated 6-12-2005 is confirmed. However, this application to the extent of Khadim Ali and Shahid, petitioners Nos.2 and 3 respectively is hereby dismissed and the order allowing pre-arrest bail to them dated supra is hereby withdrawn. H.B.T./A-73/L Order accordingly.