1995 P Cr (PLP)
SAJJAD alias SOHNI (Police also described his alias as Akram) — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1995 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SAJJAD alias SOHNI (Police also described his alias as Akram) — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 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: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (SAJJAD alias SOHNI (Police also described his alias as Akram) — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Siddique Chughtai for Petitioner
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/324/452/148/149
Accused who was in jail for last more than 17 months had been declared innocent by the Investigating Agency and on the basis of gaid report had been discharged by the Magistrate
Accused had allegedly caused simple injuries to the prosecution witnesses
Eight co- accused had already been admitted to bail by High Court
Case against accused, therefore, needed further inquiry
Judgment & Decree
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/324/452/148/149
Accused who was in jail for last more than 17 months had been declared innocent by the Investigating Agency and on the basis of gaid report had been discharged by the Magistrate
Accused had allegedly caused simple injuries to the prosecution witnesses
Eight co- accused had already been admitted to bail by High Court
Case against accused, therefore, needed further inquiry
Accused was allowed bail in circumstances. Muhammad Siddique Chughtai for Petitioner Muhammad Anwar Nasir for the Complainant Pervaiz Inayat Malik and Waheed Anwar for the State. On 30-5-1992, a case under section 302/324/452/148/149, P.P.C. was registered on the statement of Zafar Iqbal against the petitioner and others with Police Station Ghakhar Mandi vide F.I.R. No. 101/92. The petitioner has sought his bail after arrest in the aforesaid case. It is contended that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. According to him, only allegation against the petitioner is that he caused simple injuries to Zafar Iqbal and Arshad P.Ws. Learned counsel also states that the petitioner was found innocent by the Investigating Officer and that on the basis of the report of the police, learned Illaqa Magistrate discharged him. The bail application has been opposed by the learned counsel for the complainant. However learned counsel for the State do not oppose the bail petition by stating that it is a case of further inquiry.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, I find it a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is in jail for the last more than 17 months. He was declared innocent by the Investigating Agency. It is also a fact that on 17-6-1993, the learned Illaqa Magistrate discharged the petitioner on the basis of the report of Investigating Agency. The petitioner allegedly caused simple injuries to the P.Ws. The fact that 8 co-accused of the petitioner have already been admitted to bail by this Court was not disputed. These facts would undoubtedly make it a case of further inquiry. This being so, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs. one lac) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Gujranwala. . N.H.Q./S-557/L Bail allowed.