1994 PLP 1300 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1300 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE 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 1994 PLP 1300 (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 1994 PLP 1300 (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: 1994 PLP 1300 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghaus Muhammad Chaudhry for Petitioners S.D. Qureshi for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/148/149/109
Accused in first three investigations had been declared innocent and in the fourth investigation conducted by Superintendent of Police (C.I.A.) one accused was found guilty of abetment
Case against accused in the circumstances was one of further inquiry being duly covered under S.497(2), Cr.P.C.
Accused who were neither previous convicts nor hardened criminals had been in judicial custody for over five months and were no longer required by the police
Judgment & Decree
The petitioners are accused of offences under section 302/148/149/ 109, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. No.283/93, dated 4-8-1993, registered at Police Station Naushera Virkan, District Gujranwala.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the State were heard at . length in respect of the contentions raised herein. It was confirmed on behalf of the State that in the first three investigations conducted in the instant case, the petitioners were declared innocent, whereas in the fourth investigation, conducted by the Superintendent of Police C.I.A., Gujranwala, the said Investigating Officer had come to the conclusion that Molvi Muhammad Ashraf, petitioner No.2, is guilty of abetment, whereas he had not given any finding with regard to Muhammad Rafique, petitioner No.1. Therefore, it is hereby held that under such circumstances, the case of the petitioners is one of further inquiry, being duly covered under the provisions of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. In this respect, reliance is placed upon P L D 1972 SC 81 and P L D 1972 SC 277, wherein it has been held that neither the law is to be stretched in favour of the prosecution nor the bail is to be 'refused as punishment. It was further confirmed on behalf of the State that the petitioners were neither previous convicts nor hardened criminals and that they have been in the judicial custody for over five months and they are no longer required by the police.
3. Therefore, the petitioners are hereby allowed bail in the sum of Rs.30,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C./Duty Magistrate, Gujranwala. N.H.Q./M-1506/1 Bail allowed