PCRLJ 2005

2005 P Cr (PLP)

ANWAR MASIH-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2004-June-4
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2005 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties ANWAR MASIH-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 P Cr (PLP)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 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: 2005 P Cr (PLP) (ANWAR MASIH-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Justin Gill and Akbar Munawar Durrani for Petitioner.
  • 3. Learned Additional Advocate-General has opposed the petition. He submits that the petitioner is guilty of a serious offence, that the same falls in the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and no case for bail at this stage is made out.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 295 & 295-A

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Case against accused had been registered on the statement of complainant who converted himself from Christianity to Islam only three months prior to occurrence

Law Officer had conceded that except complainant there was no other eye-witness of the occurrence

Prima facie some old ill-will existed between accused and complainant

In a previous criminal case father of accused .was an eye-witness against complainant

Accused had no previous criminal history and he was a poor labourer having three children to look after

Question of guilt of accused would require further inquiry

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.625, dated 28-11-2003 under sections 295, 295-A, P.P.C. Police Station Shandara Town, Lahore, registered on the statement of Naseer Ahmad who stated that he converted to Islam about three months prior to the occurrence, that on the fateful day and time he was asked by the petitioner as to why he had kept beard to which he replied that it was the practice of Prophets and petitioner allegedly started abusing the Prophets.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record affidavit of petitioner to the effect that he never abused the Prophets, that on account of previous enmity the case has been registered, that petitioner is a witness in the case registered vide F.I.R. No.19 of 2002 of the same police station in which the complainant and his father were the accused. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a poor labourer and he has three minor children to look after. Lastly submitted that in Criminal Miscellaneous No.676 of 2000 convict under section 295-A, and C, P.P.C. was acquitted on the affidavit disowning that he never committed such an offence.

3. Learned Additional Advocate-General has opposed the petition. He submits that the petitioner is guilty of a serious offence, that the same falls in the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and no case for bail at this stage is made out.

4. I have heard petitioner's learned counsel and the learned Law Officer and have gone through the record with the assistance of the latter.

5. Petitioner has placed on record an affidavit to the following effect:-- urdu 1638 The case has been registered on the statement of a person (complainant) who converted from Christianity to Islam only three months prior to the occurrence. Learned Law Officer concedes that except the complainant there is no other eye-witnesses of occurrence. Prima facie there is some old ill-will between the petitioner and complainant. There is no denial that in a previous criminal case petitioner's father is an eye-witness against the complainant. It is further A not denied that petitioner has no previous criminal history and he is a poor labourer and has three children to look after. In the afore-referred circumstances the question of petitioner's guilt would require further inquiry. Resultantly this petition is allowed and subject to petitioner's furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court he shall be released on bail. H.B.T./A-511/L Bail granted.