1989 PLP 760 (MLD)
ZULFIQAR AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 760 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rashid Aziz Khan, J |
| Parties | ZULFIQAR AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 760 (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 1989 PLP 760 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 760 (MLD) (ZULFIQAR AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Salim Akhtar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused was alleged to have fired ineffective shot, after he was hit with a brick‑bat and received two injuries on his head‑‑Case being of further inquiry, accused was entitled to concession of bail. Miss Yasmeen Saighal for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused was alleged to have fired ineffective shot, after he was hit with a brick‑bat and received two injuries on his head‑‑Case being of further inquiry, accused was entitled to concession of bail. M. Salim Akhtar for Petitioner. Miss Yasmeen Saighal for the State. A case under section 307, P.P.C. stands registered against the petitioner with Police Station Mozang, Lahore, vide F.I.R. dated 29‑9‑1988. The case was got registered by Muhammad Ashraf with the allegation that on 29‑9‑1988, at about 5/6 p.m., the first informant Muhammad Ashraf alongwith his friend Muhammad Salim went to the petitioner from whom Muhammad Ashraf was to take back his money. When they reached Mozang Adda they met the petitioner. The first informant asked him why he had not paid the amount; whereupon the petitioner abused him and said that he will not return the amount. The first informant also abused him. The petitioner is alleged to have given slap to Muhammad Ashraf whereupon he picked up brick‑bat and hit it on the head of the petitioner. The petitioner is alleged to hove taken out pistol from the Shalwar and fired which did not hit anybody. He tried to fire again but did not succeed. The commotion attracted many people, therefore, the petitioner ran away. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the case against the petitioner is false. Submits that the first informant is not injured at all instead the petitioner had received two injuries on his head. The contentions have been opposed by learned counsel for the State.
2. I have heard learned counsel. The petitioner is alleged to have fired an ineffective shot, when he had been hit by the first informant‑with a brick‑bat. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner has some force that if the petitioner was standing so close to the first informant then he could never have missed the target had he fired. I feel it is a case of further inquiry which entitles A the petitioner to the concession of bail. Therefore, the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Lahore. H.B.T./ Z‑94/LBail allowed.