2009 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 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 2009 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: 2009 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Usman Karim-ud-Din for Petitioner.
- 3. It is argued by learned counsel for petitioner that one co-accused Mushtaq Ahmad having similar role has been enlarged on bail as the complainant lady had given a statement in his favour; that the recovery was planted and that no role was attributed to the petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.394
Involvement of accused in the case was fully established during investigation
Recovery of pistol, wrist watch gold ornaments including pair of ear-rings spoke heavily against accused
Accused was arrested the same day
Injury on the body of the victim was a stamp of truth of the F.I.R.
Offence committed by accused was hideous in nature
Granting bail to accused would amount to trivialize and play down the gravity of the offence committed by him
Alleged statement of the complainant lady in favour of the co-accused would in no manner be helpful to accused
Co-accused had pressurized the complainant which amounted to tampering with the prosecution evidence
In non-compoundable cases, affidavit of any prosecution witness would not carry much weight at bail stage
Accused appeared to be a criminal with considerable clouts, he was not entitled to be released on bail.
Judgment & Decree
S. ALI HASSAN RIZVI, J.
Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R No.65 of 2007 under section 394, P.P.C. registered with Police Station Hanjarwal, Lahore.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 24-1-2007, the complainant lady was alone in her house and he along with his co-accused armed with dagger trespassed into the house, caused a dagger blow hitting her on the belly and looted the valuable articles by show of force.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for petitioner that one co-accused Mushtaq Ahmad having similar role has been enlarged on bail as the complainant lady had given a statement in his favour; that the recovery was planted and that no role was attributed to the petitioner.
4. Conversely, learned D.P.-G assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposes these grounds.
5. The involvement of the petitioner was fully established during investigation. Recovery of pistol, wrist watch, gold ornaments including pair of earrings speaks heavily against him. He was arrested the same day. Injury on the belly of the victim, was a stamp of truth of the F.I.R. The petitioner's involvement having been established, he has been duly challaned. The offence committed by the petitioner is hideous in nature. Granting him bail, would amount to trivialize and play down the gravity of the offence committed by him. The alleged statement of the complainant lady in favour of the co-accused would in no manner be helpful to the petitioner. On the other hand, it was indicative of the fact that the co-accused had pressurized her which amounted to tampering with the prosecution evidence. In non-compoundable cases, affidavit of any P.W. would not carry much weight at bail stage. The reason is that the veracity of the shift made by the P.W. from her earlier statement before the police, would be tested in the course of trial when prosecution will have also an opportunity to cross-examine him/her. The petitioner appears to be a criminal with considerable clouts. He is not entitled to be released on bail. I, therefore, dismiss his petition. H.B.T./M-287/L Bail refused.