2007 PLP 2883 (YLR)
AMEER HAMZA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 2883 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J |
| Parties | AMEER HAMZA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2883 (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 2007 PLP 2883 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2883 (YLR) (AMEER HAMZA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Mumtaz Ahmed Watoo for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302
Dispute, in the ..present case was whether the accused was involved in offence under S. 302, P. P. C. and not that accused had committed offence covered under S. 324, P. P. C. which fell within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr. P. C.
Cause of delay was also attributed to accused party by the Trial Court
Bail application of accused was dismissed in circumstances. Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Complainant. Ijaz Ahmad Bajwa for the State. Majeed A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.
The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in F.I.R No.190/04, .dated 21-5-2004, under sections 302, 324, 148 and 149 PPC. The said F.I.R. was registered at P.S. Qaboola Sharif, District Pakpattan.
2. Briefly according to the F.I.R. co-accused Sajid Iqbal fired a shot with 12-bore gun which hit Muhammad Sarwar son of the complainant in his chest, who died at the spot. After hearing the firing, Qasim Ali another son of the complainant came out, who was fired upon by the petitioner with his .12-bore gun. Qasim Ali son of the complainant .was hit on right ribs, arms and other parts of his body.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the investigation, the petitioner was placed in column No.2 and one Anwar was found guilty. In the second investigation, DSP also concluded that Anwar had killed the deceased instead of petitioner. It was also concluded during the investigation that the petitioner had fired in his self-defence. Another investigation followed, by which, it was concluded that the petitioner had committed an offence covered under section 324 PPC instead of 302, P.P.C.
4. According to the learned counsel for the complainant, the petitioner was arrested on 28-6-2005 and in all investigations he was found guilty in offence under section. 324 PPC and he also remained absconder for one year. The learned counsel submitted that order-sheet of the trial court indicates that the accused party is causing delay in the conclusion of the trial.
5. I have heard that learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
6. Though there is dispute whether the petitioner is involved in offence under section 302 PPC or not, however, there is no dispute that he committed offence covered by section 324, P.P.C. which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The cause of the delay is also attributed to the accused party by the learned trial court. Therefore, for the above reasons, this bail application is dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to make effort to complete the trial within next two months. H.B.T./A-70/L Bail refused.