SCMR 1998

1998 PLP 526 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD SADIQ and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Petition No. 137 of 1994 (converted into appeal), decided on 20th December, 1994.
Honorable Judges
Saiduzzaman Siddiqui and Mukhtar Ahmad Juneio, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1998 PLP 526 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Saiduzzaman Siddiqui and Mukhtar Ahmad Juneio, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD SADIQ and another‑‑‑Petitioners 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 1998 PLP 526 (SCMR)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 526 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiduzzaman Siddiqui and Mukhtar Ahmad Juneio, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 526 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SADIQ and another‑‑‑Petitioners 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

  • M. Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
  • Date of hearing: 20th December, 1994.
  • M. Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
  • Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
  • Syed Zia Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
  • The petition was contested by Syed Zia Hussain, Advocate, for the complainant, who argued that there was strong evidence of motive besides the extra-judicial confession made by petitioner Muhammad Sadiq.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 18‑10‑1994 of the Lahore High; Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi passed in Cr.M. No. 661/13 of 1994). ‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Reasonable grounds did not exist to believe that accused had committed murder of the deceased, an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years‑‑ Petition for leave to appeal was, consequently, converted into appeal and the accused were admitted to bail accordingly. Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Syed Zia Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

MUKHTAR AHMAD JUNEJO, J.

Petitioners Muhammad Sadiq and Akhtar Javed have sought leave to appeal against an order, dated 18-10-1994 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dismissing their prayer for bail, in a case which was outcome of F.I.R. No.33 of 1994 of Police Station Dhuman, District Chakwal. Said F.I.R., relates to murder of Aurangzab on the night between 7th and 8th of October, 1993, which was registered on 19-4-1994 on an application moved by Walayat Ali brother of the deceased. In his F.I.R., he explained that on the night of incident at 11.00 p.m. or 12.00 midnight he had seen incised wounds on person of Aurangzeb but thought the same to have been caused by some wild animal and thereafter, the dead body of the deceased was buried. It was added that a few days before the incident, the deceased was given threat by one Muhammad Salim, whom the deceased had stopped from visiting his house. Complainant's son Qasim Ali told this to the complainant after he came to the village from Lahore, a few days after the death of Aurangzeb. On the application of Walayat Ali, the dead body of Aurangzeb was exhumed and examined by a doctor who found three penetrating wounds over chest and abdominal cavity. The doctor found the body to be in advanced condition of decomposition. He found the injuries to have been caused by sharp-edged weapon and they were opined to be sufficient to cause death of the deceased the police investigated the case and an interim challan is said to have been placed in Court. Mr. Muhammad Munir Peracha, learned counsel for the petitioners, argued that the F.I.R., was lodged after a period of six months and that there is no evidence to connect the petitioners with the killing of Aurangzeb, except that an extra-judicial confession is said to have been made by petitioner Muhammad Sadiq before Fazal Hussain and Muhammad Jahangir on 13-5-1994. The police examined one Mst Zubaida sister of the deceased on 30-4-1994 and she gave a different motive for the alleged offence. The petition was contested by Syed Zia Hussain, Advocate, for the complainant, who argued that there was strong evidence of motive besides the extra-judicial confession made by petitioner Muhammad Sadiq. Raja Abdul Ghafoor, learned counsel for the State, conceded that the F.I.R., was lodged very late but argued that explanation for that was that the complainant was misled by one Salim to the effect that injuries on the person of Aurangzeb were caused by some wild animal. It was next argued that petitioner Muhammad Sadiq was alleged to have caused disappearance of evidence by removing blood-stained shirt of the deceased and by washing blood from the place of incident. The learned Single Judge in Chamber relied on the extra-judicial confession made by Muhammad Sadiq before Fazal Hussain and Muhammad Jahangir on 13-5-1994 and also accepted statement of Mst. Zubaida about motive to be correct and for said reasons declined bail. After hearing the learned counsel, we are of the view that reasonable grounds do not appear to exist that the petitioners committed murder of Aurangzeb, an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years. This petition is, therefore, converted into appeal and allowed. The appellants are, consequently, granted bail in the sum of Rs.fifty thousand each with one surety in the like amount to be furnished in the Trial Court. N.H.Q./M-3057/S Bail granted.