2011 SCMR 954 (PLP)
QEEMAT GUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2011 SCMR 954 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Nasir-ul-Mulk and Khilji Arif Hussain, JJ |
| Parties | QEEMAT GUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 SCMR 954 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 SCMR 954 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nasir-ul-Mulk and Khilji Arif Hussain, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 SCMR 954 (PLP) (QEEMAT GUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Noor Alam Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 24th February, 2010.
- 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that neither the petitioner nor his son was travelling in the car, which is evident from the fact that despite the serious accident of the vehicle they have not suffered a bruise. That the entire police case regarding firing by the accused is false and that whereas three of the accused received firearm injuries none was injured from the police party. The Additional Advocate-General N.-W.F.P., however, argued that the presence of the petitioner at the place at odd hours of the morning with no residences around could not be explained by the petitioner. That a huge quantity of Charas weighing three Maunds was recovered from the vehicle.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar dated 11-8-2009 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Petition No. 1135 of 2009).
Ss. 324/353/148/149
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Attempt to commit qatl-e-amd and possession of narcotic drugs
Conversion of petition from leave to appeal into appeal
Three of accused persons travelling in vehicle in question received firearm injuries and one of them was killed
Police party escaped completely unhurt notwithstanding the allegation that they fired in self-defence
Vehicle, admittedly was severely damaged in, the accident
Vehicle had gone out of control after its driver was hit in the firing
Despite the serious accident, the petitioner was not hurt and no firearm was recovered, from him
Petitioner had been in detention since July, 2009 and was entitled to bail in circumstance
Petition was converted into appeal and was allowed
Accused would be released on bail, in circumstances. Qaiser Rasheed, Additional A.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
NASIR-UL-MULK, J.
After being declined bail by all the courts, the petitioner has tiled this petition for leave to appeal praying for his release on bail in a case registered under sections 324, 353, 148, 149, P.P.C. read with section 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered on the report of S.H.O. of Police Station Karak in Police Station Banda Daud Shah, District Karak.
2. The S.H.O. had alleged that he had prior information about the trafficking of narcotics in a motor car and on the basis of this tip off, he organized a police party. That as per information the motor car came along and was signalled to stop but instead the car speeded away. That he and the police party followed the vehicle and its occupants fired at the police party, who also returned the fire in self-defence. That after some chase the vehicle went out of control of the driver and met an accident. That three of the occupants of the vehicle Usman Ghani son of Sakhi Marjan, Khalid Usman and one Nasibullah, who was driving the vehicle received injuries and apart from the three, two other persons, Qeemat Gul and Muhammad Abid, who were also co-occupants of the vehicle, were arrested. Usman Ghani, later succumbed to his injuries.
3. The accused, Muhammad Abid, has been admitted to bail by the High Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that neither the petitioner nor his son was travelling in the car, which is evident from the fact that despite the serious accident of the vehicle they have not suffered a bruise. That the entire police case regarding firing by the accused is false and that whereas three of the accused received firearm injuries none was injured from the police party. The Additional Advocate-General N.-W.F.P., however, argued that the presence of the petitioner at the place at odd hours of the morning with no residences around could not be explained by the petitioner. That a huge quantity of Charas weighing three Maunds was recovered from the vehicle.
5. Three of the accused travelling in the car in question received firearm injuries and one of them was killed. The police party escaped completely unhurt notwithstanding the allegation that they fired in self-defence. Admittedly the vehicle was severely damaged in the accident. It appears that the vehicle went out of control after the driver, Nasibullah, was hit in the firing. Notwithstanding the serious accident the petitioner was not hurt and further no firearm was recovered from him. He has been in detention since July, 2009.
6. In this view of the matter, he is entitled to bail. The petition is therefore, converted into appeal and allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail provided furnishing of bail bonds of sum of Rs. 500,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./Q-1/SC Appeal allowed.