2006 PLP 1962 (YLR)
SHEHZAD ABBAS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1962 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J |
| Parties | SHEHZAD ABBAS — 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 1962 (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 1962 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1962 (YLR) (SHEHZAD ABBAS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Imran Mehmood Akhtar and Fauzul Kabir for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 34
Case of one of the accused persons was identical with that of co-accused who had been admitted to bail
Said accused, also deserved bail on ground of parity
One single injury by wire lock hunter was attributed to second accused
According to post-mortem report, injury attributed to said second accused was simple in nature and he was found innocent during investigation by Police
Said opinion of Police was based on evidence of about thirty persons who appeared in defence of said accused
Allegation qua second accused, in circumstances, needed further inquiry within the ambit of subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr. P. C.
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. M.A. Farazi for the State with Muhammad Saleem, A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, J.
Shehzad Abbas, petitioner, through Crl. Miscellaneous No.1315-B of 2005/BWP and Shehzad Ahmad Qureshi, petitioner, through Crl. Miscellaneous No.1327-B of 2005/BWP have sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.394, registered at Police Station, Baghdad-ul-Jadid, on 11-8-2005 for offences under sections 302/34, P.P.C.
2. Both the applications are being decided through this single order as they arise out of the same occurrence.
3. The relevant facts per F.I.R. are that Hasnain armed with pistol, Shahzad Abbas armed with wire lock hunter, Shahzad Ahmad and Zubair Ahmad launched criminal assault upon Bashir Ahmad son of the complainant. Shahzad Abbas, petitioner, caused injury with the wire lock hunter on the head of Bashir Ahmad, who fell down. Thereafter, Shahzad Qureshi and Zubair Qureshi gave kick blows to Bashir Ahmad. Husnain, accused after raising Lalkara caused injury with pistol on the left flank of Bashir Ahmad. Thereafter, the accused left the scene of occurrence and Bashir Ahmad, succumbed to the injuries. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant record of the case.
5. It has been noticed that the case of Shahzad Ahmad Qureshi, petitioner is identical to that of Zubair Qureshi who has been admitted to bail vide order dated 28-11-2005. Hence, he also deserves bail on the ground of parity. As far as Shahzad A Abbas, petitioner is concerned one single injury by wire lock hunter is attributed to him. According to post-mortem report the injury was simple in nature, he was found innocent during investigation by the D.S.P. concerned. The opinion of the police officer is based on the evidence of about thirty persons who appeared in defence of petitioner Shahzad Abbas. In the circumstances, the allegation qua Shahzad Abbas, petitioner needs further probe and inquiry within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Thus, I admit both the petitioners to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of rupees one lac each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./S-518/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.