2003 P Cr (PLP)
QADIR BAKHSH alias QADIRA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2003 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | QADIR BAKHSH alias QADIRA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 P Cr (PLP) (QADIR BAKHSH alias QADIRA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed M. Tariq Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Bail, grant of-- Accused had been named in the F.I.R. and a specific roll had been attributed to him
Father of the accused who had fired the Fatal shot at the deceased being fugitive from law, apprehensions of abscondence of tae accused, could not be ruled out
Complete challan had been submitted in the Court, the charge had since been framed against the accused and the trial was in progress
Accused, in circumstances, was not entitled to concession of bail.
Judgment & Decree
Syed M. Jamil Anwar Shah for the Complainant Ghazanfar Ali Khan for the State. The petitioner has applied for the post arrest bail in se F.I.R. No.69, dated 15-3-2001 registered under sections 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Pacca Laran, Tehsil Liaquatpur.
2. According to the prosecution story, the complainant Munir Ahmad alongwith his brother Allah Bachaya, Saeed Ahmad, Madad Khan arid Ashiq were coming back from election campaign a Tonga. They disembarked at Hatti Hayat Khan and started towards their house on foot. They were accosted by Faqir Bakhsh alias Faqeera armed with .12 bore gun and Qadir Bakhsh alias Qadira (petitioner) armed with .12 bore pistol and after raising Lalkara Faqir Bakhsh directly fired at Allah Bachaya which hit him in the chest. Allah Bachaya succumbed to his injuries. The role attributed to the petitioner was that he continued firing in the air and prevented the complainant and the P.Ws. from coming near them and thus, made good their escape.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case. Only ineffective firing has been attributed to him. No crime-empties were recovered from the post connecting the petitioner with ineffective firing. He stated that it was a case of further inquiry and that the petitioner is entitled to bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as the complainant counsel contended that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and a specific role is attributed to him. The petitioner as well as his co accused Faqir Bakhsh, who is father of the petitioner had committed the offence with common intention to murder Allah Bachaya. He also stated that the principal accused namely Faqir Bakhsh is an absconder. There is every likelihood that the petitioner may also abscond if the concession of bail is granted to him. He also submitted that the challan in this case has been submitted in the trial Court wherein charge has been framed against the petitioner on 4-1-2002.
5. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
6. The petitioner has been named in the F.I.R. and a specific role has been attributed to him. His father Faqir Bakhsh who fired the fatal shot at the deceased is a fugitive, from law. The apprehension or absconsion of the petitioner cannot be ruled out. The complete challan has been submitted in the Court. The charge has since been framed against the petitioner on 4-1-2002 and the trial is in progress.
7. Considering the abovementioned circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. The petition is dismissed accordingly. H.B.T./Q-31/L Bail application dismissed.