2004 P Cr (PLP)
ALI MURAD — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2004 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ALI MURAD — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| 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 Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 P Cr (PLP) (ALI MURAD — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/337-A(ii), F(i)/147/148/114
Co-accused was granted bail and case of accused was identical to that of co-accused
Charge in the case had not been framed
Allegation against accused was of Lathi blow on person of deceased who allegedly had received four injuries and only one injury was attributed to accused
State Counsel conceded to grant of bail to accused on ground of delay
Accused was granted bail on plea of hardship and delay.
Judgment & Decree
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/337-A(ii), F(i)/147/148/114
Co-accused was granted bail and case of accused was identical to that of co-accused
Charge in the case had not been framed
Allegation against accused was of Lathi blow on person of deceased who allegedly had received four injuries and only one injury was attributed to accused
State Counsel conceded to grant of bail to accused on ground of delay
Accused was granted bail on plea of hardship and delay. Jai Jai Vehsnu for Applicant. Sayed Mehboob Ali Shah State Counsel. The applicant Ali Murad son of Shamsuddin Pathan, involved in Crime No.71 of 2000, P.S. Rustam, offence under sections 302, 337-HA(ii) and Fi, 147, 148, 114, P.P.C. Claims bail on the ground of delay and hardship in addition to fact that other co-accused Shamsuddin was extended bail. According to learned counsel case of applicant is identical to that of Shamsuddin who was extended benefit of bail in Cr.B.A. No.98 of 2003, by another member of this Bench, vide order, dated 20-1-2003. Charge, in this case has not yet been framed. Allegation against the present applicant is of Lathi blow on the person of Samar Khan. He is alleged to have received four injuries, one injury is attributed to the applicant as was the case of Shamsuddin. Learned State Counsel fairly concedes the bail on the ground of delay Further co-accused persons appears to be enjoying the benefit of bail. Under circumstances, looking at the fact that no charge is yet been framed and for the fact that Court is lying vacant since 3-7-2003, as reported in the bail order in Cr.B.A. No.98 of 2003, present applicant is also extended benefit of bail on the plea of hardship and delay, subject to furnishing two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one hundred thousand) and P.R. bond in the like amount. In the case the applicant misuses the concession of bail, the learned trial Court may cancel the bail. H. B. T./A-112/K Bail granted.