1987 PLP 3084 (MLD)
ZAHID BAJWA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 3084 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Afrasiab Khan, J |
| Parties | ZAHID BAJWA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 3084 (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 1987 PLP 3084 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Afrasiab Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 3084 (MLD) (ZAHID BAJWA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch.Sanaullah Bajwa for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 307; 34 & 109--Bail, grant of--No overt act attributed to accused and case against him one of further inquiry--Bail allowed. Altaf Muhammad Khan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 307; 34 & 109--Bail, grant of--No overt act attributed to accused and case against him one of further inquiry--Bail allowed. Ch.Sanaullah Bajwa for Petitioner. Altaf Muhammad Khan for the State. The petitioner Zahid Bajwa has moved this petition for bail after arrest under section 497, Cr.P.C. in a case registered against him under section 302/307/34/109, P.P.C. at Police Station Naulakha, Lahore, vide F.I.R. No. 229 dated 3-6-1987. 2. It is argued that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he raised a lalkara at the place of occurrence and further he did not cause any injury to the deceased or to any witness in the case. The learned counsel for the State has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. He has stated that this is a murder case and the name of the petitioner is mentioned in the F.I.R. and further he was also armed with a stick. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I am of the view that this is a case of further inquiry inasmuch as admittedly no overt act was attributed to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 80,000/- (Rupees eighty thousand) with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. M.Y.H/Z-26/L Bail allowed.