2006 PLP 1863 (YLR)
MUBARIK ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1863 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui, J |
| Parties | MUBARIK ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1863 (YLR)?
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 1863 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1863 (YLR) (MUBARIK ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tariq Zulfiqar Ali Ch. for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337-A(i), 450 & 34
Accused was behind the bars for the last five months and there was no likelihood of commencement of trial in near future and even charge had not been framed
No recovery of crime weapon i.e. pistol was made in the case
Prosecution witnesses named in F.I.R. had given affidavits wherein they had not supported involvement of accused in alleged occurrence
No previous history of involvement of accused in such-like cases
Injury allegedly attributed to accused fell within mischief of S.337-A(i), P.P.C. for which punishment was 2 years
Delay of five days was in lodging F.I.R., which was not properly explained
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Sh. Arshad Ali for the State.
Judgment & Decree
NAZIR AHMED SIDDIQUI, J.--Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.497 of 2004, dated 1-10-2004 under sections 450, 337-A(i) and 34, P.P.C. Police Station, Harrappa District Sahiwal.
2. As per F.I.R., petitioner was found in the courtyard of the complainant's house along with another person and he caused an injury on the head of the complainant with butt of his pistol.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. Petitioner is behind the bars for the last five months and there is no likelihood of commencement of trial in near future inasmuch as the charge has not been framed; that there is no recovery of the crime weapon i.e. pistol; that the P.Ws. named in the F.I.R. have given the affidavits wherein they have not supported the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence; that there , is no previous history of involvement of the petitioner in such-like cases; that the injury A allegedly attributed to the petitioner falls within the mischief of section 337-A(i), P.P.C. for which punishment is 2 years; that there is a delay of five days in lodging the F.I.R., not properly explained.
5. For what has been stated above, instant petition is allowed by admitting the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs. One lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-194/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.