1995 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1995 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD NAWAZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 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 1995 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD NAWAZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Abdus Sattar Najam for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Offence under S. 13 of Ordinance being bailable bail Was granted. Shafiq v. State 1983 P Cr. LJ 1296 rel. Qamaruddin Meo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Shafiq v. State 1983 P Cr. LJ 1296 rel. Mian Abdus Sattar Najam for Petitioner. Qamaruddin Meo for the State. This is petition for bail on behalf of Muhammad Nawaz petitioner, who is involved in a case under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965. Initially the case was registered under section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 1‑10‑1987 he was found in possession of two hand‑grenades which were recovered from him by a police party. On inquiry, the A.S.I. states that the challan has been submitted under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Shafiq v. State 1983 PCr.LJ 1296 and Schedule II of the Criminal Procedure Code, to contend that A the offence under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965, is bailable. Learned State Counsel does not controvert this contention.
4. In the circumstances, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.25,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C., Bhalwal. A.A./M‑1889/L Bail granted.