PCRLJ 1994

1994 P Cr (PLP)

NASEEM ZAIB and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
1994-September-12
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1994 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties NASEEM ZAIB and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 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: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (NASEEM ZAIB and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 497(2) & 103

Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art.3/4

Bail, grant of

Recovery had been effected in violation of S.103, Cr.P.C. from a car which was not a public place

Case against accused, therefore, was doubtful and needed further inquiry

Accused were admitted to bail in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, A.A.-G. Petitioners have applied for post-arrest bail in a case registered against them vide F. I. R. No.206/1994 dated 6-3-1994 under section 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 4 of 1979 at Police Station Nawan Kot, C. I. A., Lahore.

2. Petitioners post-arrest bail applications were dismissed on 24-3-1994 and 6-4-1994 by Illaqa Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore respectively.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent; that the recoveries are fake and no independent witness has been taken from where the recoveries have been made and statutory provision of section 103, Cr.P.C. has been violated that the alleged recovery was being effected in a car and it is not a public place. Moreover, the offences do not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

4. On the other head, learned counsel for State submits that the accused were caught red-handed alongwith 260 Cuppies of liquor in their possession; that the case is proved against them beyond any reasonable doubt.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused.

6. Admittedly, there is a clear violation of provision 103, Cr.P.C. and recovery has been effected from a car which is not a public place. It makes the case doubtful and' a case of further inquiry. This being the position the A petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing their bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only) each with one surety to the satisfaction of Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Lahore.

7. Observation made in this order shall not effect the merits of the case. N. H. Q./N-273/L Bail allowed,