1982 PLP 254 (SCMR)
GULZAR alias GULZARI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE- Respondent
| Citation | 1982 PLP 254 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | -----S. 497(5)-Bail, cancellation of-Two prosecution witnesses seeing accused in company of deceased in shop where murder took place. Another witness seeing accused petitioner running away froth spot of occurrence in a confused state of mind-Petitioner producing one purse containing articles of deceased and also deceased's wrist watch. Petitioner also producing blood-stained toka and blood-stained clothes-Cancellation of bail on such circumstantial evidence, held, not liable to be interfered with-Penal Code (XLV of 1.860), S. 302 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).--Evidence. |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | GULZAR alias GULZARI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE- Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 PLP 254 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1982 PLP 254 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the -----S. 497(5)-Bail, cancellation of-Two prosecution witnesses seeing accused in company of deceased in shop where murder took place. Another witness seeing accused petitioner running away froth spot of occurrence in a confused state of mind-Petitioner producing one purse containing articles of deceased and also deceased's wrist watch. Petitioner also producing blood-stained toka and blood-stained clothes-Cancellation of bail on such circumstantial evidence, held, not liable to be interfered with-Penal Code (XLV of 1.860), S. 302 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).--Evidence. bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 PLP 254 (SCMR) (GULZAR alias GULZARI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE- Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S. Inayat Hassain, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 14th December, 1977.
- Malik M. Akbar, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Ijaz Ali, Advocate on‑Record for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(5)-Bail, cancellation of-Two prosecution witnesses seeing accused in company of deceased in shop where murder took place. Another witness seeing accused petitioner running away froth spot of occurrence in a confused state of mind-Petitioner producing one purse containing articles of deceased and also deceased's wrist watch. Petitioner also producing blood-stained toka and blood-stained clothes-Cancellation of bail on such circumstantial evidence, held, not liable to be interfered with-Penal Code (XLV of 1.860), S. 302 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).--[Evidence]. Malik M. Akbar, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Ijaz Ali, Advocate on-Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, J.‑This is a bail matter. The petitioner had been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura by order, dated 18‑9‑1976 but on appeal in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 660th of 1977, a learned Single Judge of the: Lahore High Court cancelled the ban of the petitioner. In this case F. I. R. was lodged by the complainant Muhammad Yusuf, It is Alleged that his younger brother Mohammad Younis used to work jointly for preparing silver leaves. He used to sleep in the, shop the night. It is further alleged that Ijaz Ahmed, Muhammad Tufail, Boota and Yunus son of Jhanda and Nazar Ahmad also used to prepare silver leaves in the shop alongwith the deceased Muhammad Yunus. According to the F. I. R. Muhammad Yusuf was going on 12‑1‑1976 towards village Kotwar when Muhammad Yunus met him, and told him that he had come from Lahore, after having made purchases. Muhammad Yusuf returned from village Kotwar at Isha time, and his mother told him that Muhammad Yunus was at the shop. On the following morning, at about 8 a.m. complainant was informed by Khadim Hussain that Muhammad Yunus had been murdered by somebody, and his dead body was lying in the shop. Tile petitioner was arrested. Bashir and Boota P. W's had seen him in the company of the deceased in the shop of Nazir Ahmed where the murder took place on the night between 12/13‑1‑1976 Besides Sultan Khan P. W. had seen the petitioner running away from the spot of occurrence in a confused state of mind. Further, the petitioner produced one purse, which contained articles of the deceased. Ha also produced a wrist watch of the deceased. The petitioner also produced blood stained Toka and blood‑stained clothes. On this circumstantial evidence, a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court has cancelled the bail of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against this Order. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are satisfied that the view taken by the High Court is correct. Prima facie there is circumstantial evidence against the petitioner. The High Court has exercised the discretion properly. There is no ground for interference. The petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.