1999 PLP 1100 (YLR)
JAWAD HAIDER KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1999 PLP 1100 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Muhammad Khurshid, J |
| Parties | JAWAD HAIDER KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 1100 (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 1999 PLP 1100 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Muhammad Khurshid, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 1100 (YLR) (JAWAD HAIDER KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aurang Zeb Mirza for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 498‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337‑A(i), 337‑L(ii), 452 & 506‑‑‑Pre arrest bail‑‑‑Accused was named in F.I.R. which was got registered by his wife‑‑ Specific role was attributed to accused, who had caused injuries . to his wife‑‑‑Seven injuries on the person of wife, all by blunt weapon were stated in the medico‑legal report‑‑‑No malice or ill‑will on the part of police was found‑‑‑Accused was not entitled to bail.
Judgment & Decree
A case under sections 45<, 506, 337‑L(II) and 337‑A‑1 is registered against the petitioner at the report of his wife Mst Shumaila Yousaf. It is contended in the report that she was married with the petitioner about four years back and was living with him alongwith three years old female child; that the petitioner was addicted to use drugs and mixed with the people of ill‑repute. She tried to make the petitioner understand that this was bad for family life; but he gave her beatings quite often. She was constrained to leave his house after receiving beating from the petitioner and went to the house of her maternal grandfather. On 12‑11‑1988 at about 9 or 10 a.m. the petitioner while armed with a pistol trespassed in the house of the maternal grandfather of the complainant i.e. his wife, and gave thrashing to her whereupon the present case was got registered.
2. The petitioner moved for pre-arrest bail in the Court of session, which was dismissed by Mr. Shaukat Ali Khan, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore on its merits vide order dated 8‑12‑1998. The petitioner instead of surrendering to his bail bond moved a petition for pre-arrest bail, which came up for hearing on 10‑12‑1998, but was dismissed as no one appeared.
3. This petition is moved on the ground that the petitioner is M.A., LL.B. and is a Tax Consultant belonging to a respectable family; that it was domestic dispute and that the complainant while living with him as his wife maltreated his handicapped mother; that her behaviour was allegedly undesirable and that the petitioner tried to prevail upon her to rectify herself. This allegedly led to family dispute whereupon the complainant started demanding divorce, and that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.
4. I have considered the foregoing facts and find that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and a specific role has been attributed to him as, he had caused injuries to the complainant i.e. his wife. The medico‑legal report shows that the complainant suffered 7 injuries, all by blunt weapon.
5. In view of the above facts, there does not appear to be any malice or ill‑will on the part of the police and the investigation should be allowed to take its usual course. The petition had been rightly dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore and there is no fresh material for reconsideration of the matter by this Court. Accordingly this petition is dismissed in limine. Q.M.H./M.A.K./J‑56/L Bail refused.