1992 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. HAJRA BIBI and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan, J |
| Parties | Mst. HAJRA BIBI and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. HAJRA BIBI and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nisar Ahmad Butt for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 4th October, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 498‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307/452/148/149‑‑‑Pre‑arrest bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused admittedly was a minor aged about 13/14' years‑‑ Minority should be a good ground for granting bail even in a case of capital offence‑‑‑Ad interim bail allowed to accused was confirmed in circumstances. Siraj Din v. Zaheer‑Ud‑Din alias Goga and anotoer P L D 1970 SC 30 ref. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 498‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307/452/148/149‑‑‑Pre‑arrest bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused, a lady had been attributed only simple injuries with blunt weapon on non‑vital part of prosecution witness‑‑‑Interim pre‑arrest bail allowed to accused was confirmed in circumstances. Mst. Guggoo v. The State P L D 1985 Pesh. 114 and Maqbool Butt etc. v. State N L R 1988 Cr.LJ 288 ref. Tariq Shakoor for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Mst. Guggoo v. The State P L D 1985 Pesh. 114 and Maqbool Butt etc. v. State N L R 1988 Cr.LJ 288 ref. Nisar Ahmad Butt for Petitioners. Tariq Shakoor for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 4th October, 1989. Mst. Hajra Bibi wife of Shafqat Hussain and Zulfiqar Hussain son of Shafaat Hussain Petitioner, have sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered against them under section 307/452/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Baghbanpura, Lahore vide F.I.R. No.350/89 dated 6-9-1989.
2. The allegation against Mst. Halra Bibi, petitioner, is that she while armed with a stick inflicted injuries on the non‑vital part of Muhammad Saddique P.W. The other petitioner Zulfiqar Hussain is alleged to have caused fire‑arm injuries to the witnesses generally.
3. The contention is that Mst. Hajra Bibi being a lady is entitled to the concession of bail and that she inflicted only simple injuries to P.W. The petitioner No.2 has asked for bail on the ground that he is a minor. Both the petitioners have heavily relied upon the proviso to section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The admitted position in. the case is that petitioner No.2 Zulfiqar Hussain is a minor aged about 13/14 years‑ In Siraj Din v. Zaheer‑ud‑Din alias Goga and another P L D 1970 SC 30, bail was allowed to the accused who was found to be 16/17 years old. It was further observed that minority should be a good ground for granting bail even in a case of capital offence Respectfully following the above judgment the ad interim bail allowed to the petitioner Zulfiqar Hussain is hereby confirmed. Petitioner No.1 is a lady and has been attributed only simple injuries with blunt weapon on non‑vital part of Muhammad Siddique P.W. In Mst. Guggoo v. The State P L D 1985 Pesh. 114 the accused was allowed pre‑arrest bail being a Parda Nasheen lady. Similarly in Maqbool Butt etc. v. State N L R 1988 Cr.L J 288 pre‑arrest bail was granted to the lady accused in a case under section 365, P.P.C. The judgments referred are respectfully followed and the interim pre‑arrest bail allowed to the petitioner Mst. Hajra is also confirmed. Both the petitioners are specifically directed to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so by the investigating officer. It has been brought to my' notice that the investigation .has been transferred to D.S.P. Cantt. Circle, Lahore from the investigator of Police Station Baghbanpura. The Investigating Officer has requested for some time to complete the investigation. The investigation in the case shall be completed within seven days time by the Investigating Officer. After completion of investigation the challan shall be submitted before the Court immediately. Whatever has been said, held and observed by me in this order shall not at all influence the opinion of the learned trial Court nor the course of trial in any way whatsoever. H.B.T./H‑17/L Bail confirmed.