2004 P Cr (PLP)
IQBAL alias BALEY (IQBAL HUSSAIN) and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2004 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Talaat Qayum Qureshi, J |
| Parties | IQBAL alias BALEY (IQBAL HUSSAIN) and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 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 2004 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Talaat Qayum Qureshi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 P Cr (PLP) (IQBAL alias BALEY (IQBAL HUSSAIN) and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Safirullah Khan for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 27th February, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑ Nature of arms which accused and absconding co‑accused were carrying were not mentioned in F.I.R.‑‑‑No allegation was made against accused that they had also used any "Aslah Atsheen"‑‑‑Accused had not even been charged for aerial firing‑‑‑Seven accused had been assigned the role of grappling with the complainant their case stood at lower pedestal than that of actual accused who had been assigned the role of effective firing and who was still absconding‑‑‑Possibility of roping accuses persons into case who were real brothers of absconding co‑accused, could not be ruled out ‑‑‑Vicarious liability of accused would be determined at trial after recording evidence‑‑‑At the moment accused only stood charged for grappling with complainant and eye‑witness and not for firing at the deceased‑‑‑Accused were admitted to bail in circumstances. Paraz Akram v. The State 1999 SCMR 1360 ref. Waheedullah Khan for the State. Ms. S. Naz Muhammadzai for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No.68 of 2004, decided on 27th February, 2004 ‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑ Nature of arms which accused and absconding co‑accused were carrying were not mentioned in F.I.R.‑‑‑No allegation was made against accused that they had also used any "Aslah Atsheen"‑‑‑Accused had not even been charged for aerial firing‑‑‑Seven accused had been assigned the role of grappling with the complainant their case stood at lower pedestal than that of actual accused who had been assigned the role of effective firing and who was still absconding‑‑‑Possibility of roping accuses persons into case who were real brothers of absconding co‑accused, could not be ruled out ‑‑‑Vicarious liability of accused would be determined at trial after recording evidence‑‑‑At the moment accused only stood charged for grappling with complainant and eye‑witness and not for firing at the deceased‑‑‑Accused were admitted to bail in circumstances. Paraz Akram v. The State 1999 SCMR 1360 ref. Safirullah Khan for Petitioners. Waheedullah Khan for the State. Ms. S. Naz Muhammadzai for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 27th February, 2004.