PCRLJ 2006

2006 P Cr (PLP)

KHURSHID ALI and 9 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2005-September-27
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties KHURSHID ALI and 9 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 P Cr (PLP)?

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: 2006 P Cr (PLP) (KHURSHID ALI and 9 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Asghar Ali Gill for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 498

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.379, 386, 337-H(2), 148 & 149

Pre-arrest bail, refusal of

Prosecution story narrated in F.I.R., showed that deadly weapons were used' in commission of offence, though nobody had received any injury in the incident

Specific role had been assigned to three accused persons who had failed to point out any material or mala fides with complainant and police to falsely involve them in the case

Recovery of crime weapons and property, was yet to be made

Said accused, in circumstances were not entitled to concession of bail

Bail petition to the extent of said accused, was dismissed.

S. 498

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.379, 386, 337-H(2), 148 & 149

Bail, grant of

General allegation was against few accused persons and they had not committed offence alleged against them in tentative assessment

Bail to said accused, was allowed.

Judgment & Decree

SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.

The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.310, dated 10-7-2005 registered under sections 379/386/337-H(2)/148/149, P.P.C. with Police Station Sharaqpur District Sheikhupura on the grounds that the petitioners have falsely been involved in the instant case with mala fide intention of the complainant and the police in order to disgrace and humiliate them.

2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant assisted by the State opposed the prayer for confirmation of pre-arrest bail.

3. Heard. Record perused.

4. According to the prosecution story narrated in the F.I.R., deadly weapons were used in the commission of offence. However, nobody received any injury in the incident. Specific role has been assigned to Khurshid Ali, Shahid Ali and Hussain Haider, petitioners Nos.1, 3 and

9. They have failed to point out any material or mala fide with the complainant and the police to falsely involve them in the present case. Recovery of crime-weapons and property is yet to be made. They are thus, not entitled to concession of bail. Their petition is dismissed.

5. As far remaining petitioners, there is general allegation against them. It appears that they have not committed the offence alleged against them in my tentative assessment. Their petition is thus, allowed subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./K-139/L Order accordingly.