2017 P Cr (PLP)
Mirza MAHMOOD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mirza MAHMOOD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 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 2017 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: 2017 P Cr (PLP) (Mirza MAHMOOD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Zia Abdul Rehman for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 34
Qatl-i-amd, common intention
Allegation against the present accused was that he along with co-accused, while armed with pistol, committed murder
Role attributed to accused was borne out from post-mortem of deceased
During investigation of the case accused had been found guilty by Investigating Officer as sole accused who had caused six fire arm injuries to deceased
Recovery of pistol had already been effected from accused during investigation
Report of Forensic Science Agency matched two empties with pistol recovered from accused
Ample evidence in shape of statements of prosecution witnesses recorded under S. 161, Cr.P.C. supported by medical evidence involving the present accused was available on record
No ill-will or animosity of complainant with accused had been brought on record and complainant could not falsely involve accused in a case of such nature
Offence with which the accused was charged fell under prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Challan had already been submitted in the Trial Court and trial was in progress
Certain arguments advanced by counsel for accused amounted to deeper appreciation of evidence which could not be appreciated at bail stage
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.
Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner Mirza Mahmood has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.99/2016 dated 02.03.2016 under sections 302, 34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station City Saray Alamgir, District Gujrat.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of this case with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation of evidence is not allowed at this stage. As per FIR the allegation against the present petitioner is that he along with his co-accused while armed with pistol .30 bore committed murder of Sania Shamshaad. The role attributed to the petitioner is borne out from the post-mortem of deceased. During the investigation of this case the petitioner has been found guilty by the Investigation Officer as sole accused who has caused six fire arms injuries to deceased. Recovery of pistol .30 bore has been affected from the petitioner during investigation. As per report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency, two empties matched with the pistol recovered from the petitioner. There is ample evidence in the shape of statements of PWs recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. supported by medical evidence involving the present petitioner in this case. So far no ill-will or animostly of the complainant with the petitioner has been brought on record so that the former could falsely involve the latter in a case of this nature. The offence with which the petitioner is charged falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Challan has been submitted in the learned trial court and trial is in progress. Rest of the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner amounts to deeper appreciation of evidence which cannot be appreciated at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above, this petition has got no force and the same is hereby dismissed.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only. WA/M-190/L Bail refused.