1986 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AMIN and others Petitioners Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rustam S. Sidhwa, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AMIN and others Petitioners Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rustam S. Sidhwa, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AMIN and others Petitioners Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Hussain Chhachhar for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 19th October, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 498‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.302/34‑‑Accused attributed simple, blunt weapon injuries to witness‑‑No injury alleged to have been inflicted to deceased by accused‑‑Accused, held, was entitled to be released on bail, in circumstances. Imtiaz Ahmad for the State. Bashir Ahmad for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Muhammad Hussain Chhachhar for Petitioner. Imtiaz Ahmad for the State. Bashir Ahmad for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 19th October, 1985. This is a petition under section 497/498, Cr.P.C. by Muhammad Amin and Muhammad Jamil, petitioners, for bail in respect of a case instituted against them and two others under section 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Renala Khurd on 12‑8‑1985.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Muhammad Amin and Muhammad Jamil, petitioners, and Yasin and Atta Muhammad, Amir co‑accused, disliked Lai Khan P.W. taking his cattle to the water Khal for quenching their thirst. On the day of occurrence, Lai Khan, P.W. who was taking his cattle to the Khal, was reprimanded by the petitioners and the co‑accused. During this occurrence, abusive language was exchanged by both the parties. When Lal Khan P.W. persisted in taking his cattle to the Khal, the two petitioners and the co‑accused came there armed with Sotas. Muhammad Jamil and Muhammad Amin petitioners, inflicted Sots injuries on Lai Khan P.W, Ghulam Hussain deceased, father of Lai Khan, came to the spot to save his son, whereupon Yasin, co‑accused, inflicted Sota blow on his head, which proved fatal, and Atta Muhammad, co‑accused, inflicted a. Sota blow on his right flank.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the complainant and the State and have also perused the police record. The two petitioners are only attributed to have inflicted simple blunt weapon injuries on Lai Khan P.W. They did not inflict any injury on Ghulam Hussain, deceased. In the circumstances, this petition p is accepted and Muhammad Amin and Muhammad Jamil, petitioners, are released on bail, subject to their furnishing security in the sum of Rs.30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Okara. S.A. Petition accepted.