1989 PLP 4982 (MLD)
SAKHAWAT ALI‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 4982 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rashid Aziz Khan, J |
| Parties | SAKHAWAT ALI‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4982 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 4982 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4982 (MLD) (SAKHAWAT ALI‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Manzoor Hussain Butt for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307 & 148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused named in F.I.R. and responsible for causing firearm injury on head of injured‑ Determination of nature of injury not material‑‑Bail refused in circumstances. Shaukat Hussain for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307 & 148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused named in F.I.R. and responsible for causing firearm injury on head of injured‑ Determination of nature of injury not material‑‑Bail refused in circumstances. Manzoor Hussain Butt for Petitioner. Shaukat Hussain for the State. A case under section 307/148/149 PPC stands registered against the petitioner and some others with Police Station Wando, District Gujranwala. The allegations against the petitioner and his co‑accused are that they came to the house of the first informant and started shouting Lalkara whereupon the mother of the first informant asked him not to go out. In the meanwhile he saw the petitioner armed with .12 bore gun and his co‑accused armed with different weapons. All the accused arc alleged to have started firing indiscriminately. The petitioner is also alleged to have fired hitting on the head of Mst. Zubeda mother of the first informant. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the case against the petitioner is false. Submits that the petitioner has been confined since 8‑10‑1988 yet not a single witness has been recorded. Contends that the injury on the person of Mst. Zubeda has been declared simple. Contentions have been opposed by learned counsel for the State.
2. I have heard learned counsel and perused the file. The petitioner is named in the FIR. He is alleged to have fired at Mst. Zubeda the inured which hit her on the head which is a vital part of the body. In these circumstances it would be immaterial to determine whether the injury in question is simple on grievous. I find no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. SA./S‑511/L Bail refused.