1995SCMR932 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus AFZAL AHMED and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1995SCMR932 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Fazal Karim, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus AFZAL AHMED and another‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995SCMR932 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995SCMR932 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Fazal Karim, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995SCMR932 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus AFZAL AHMED and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Qadeer Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court and Walayat Umar Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 10th August, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 15‑6‑1994 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Cr. Misc. No. 2055/13 of 1994). Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 497 (5) & 498‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Cancellation of bail‑‑‑Occurrence was unwitnessed‑‑‑Evidence available against accused consisted of recovery of blood‑stained hatchet at his instance about two months after the occurrence, extra‑judicial confession allegedly made by him before two witnesses and his having been seen alongwith others near the place of occurrence on the night of occurrence‑‑‑Order of High Court allowing bail to accused in the light of the material available on record did not suffer from any legal infirmity‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J: ‑‑Muhammad Hussain petitioner/complainant seeks leave to appeal from the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 15‑6‑1994 whereby he allowed bail to the respondent in a murder case.
2. It was an unwitnessed occurrence and the evidence collected by the Investigating Agency against the respondent consisted of the following pieces:‑‑ (a) recovery of blood‑stained hatchet at his instance about two months after the occurrence; (b) extra judicial confession allegedly made by him about the commission of murder before two witnesses; and (c) he was seen alongwith others near the place of occurrence on the night of occurrence.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the evidence on the record prima facie links the respondent with the commission of crime and the offence falls within the prohibitory clause, therefore, there was no justification for his enlargement on bail.
4. After considering the above submission in the light of material available on the record we do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned order. The petition has no merit and is dismissed. N.H.Q./M‑2164/S Leave refused.