2014 PLP 1349 (SCMR)
Malik MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2014 PLP 1349 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Amir Hani Muslim and Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, JJ |
| Parties | Malik MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 1349 (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 2014 PLP 1349 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Amir Hani Muslim and Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 1349 (SCMR) (Malik MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aftab Hussain Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 16th January, 2013.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 26-12-2012 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No.17387-B of 2012)
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 337-A(i), 337-F(iii), 337-L(2) & 34
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Shajjah-i-khafifah, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, other hurt, common intention
Belated recovery of weapon of offence from accused inconsequential for the prosecution
Accused allegedly gave a hatchet blow to the injured victim, which blow landed on a finger attracting provisions of S. 337-F(iii), P.P.C.
Plea of prosecution that accused should not be granted pre-arrest bail as hatchet used by him during the occurrence was yet to be recovered from him
Although hatchet was not recovered from the accused as yet, but the occurrence took place about three months ago, during which period any blood available on the hatchet must have disintegrated leaving the proposed recovery to be of little legal consequence
Accused could not be deprived of his liberty merely to facilitate the investigating officer to go through a formality which was not likely to serve any beneficial purpose for the prosecution
Section 337-F(iii), P.P.C. carried a maximum punishment of three years' imprisonment
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and consequently accused was granted pre-arrest bail. Ch. Zubair Ahmed Farooq, Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab and Jaffar Khan, S.-I. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.
Through this petition Malik Muhammad Aslam petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the order dated 26-12-2012 passed by a learned Judge-in- Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17387-B of 2012 whereby pre-arrest bail was refused to him in case F.I.R. No. 495 registered at Police Station Lundianwala, District Faisalabad on 19-10-2012 in respect of offences under sections 337F(iii)/337-L(2)/34, P.P.C. During the investigation section 337-A(i), P.P.C. had been added to the F.I.R.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record with their assistance we have observed that according to the F.I.R. the allegation against the petitioner is that he had given a blow from the wrong side of his hatchet to Muhammad Mushtaq complainant which blow had landed on the little finger of his right hand attracting the provisions of section 337-F(iii), P.P.C. An offence under section 337-F(iii), P.P.C. carries a maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner three co-accused of the petitioner have already been admitted to pre-arrest bail in this case and the said co-accused had given some simple injuries to the complainant on different parts of his body. The investigating officer has confirmed the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation but he has maintained that a hatchet is yet to be recovered from the petitioner's custody and, thus, the petitioner's physical custody is required by him for the said purpose. In this connection we have noticed that the occurrence in this case had taken place on 16-10-2012, i.e. exactly three months ago, during which period any blood available on the petitioner's hatchet must have disintegrated leaving the proposed recovery to be of little legal consequence. In this view of the matter we have not felt persuaded to deprive the petitioner of his liberty merely to facilitate the investigating officer to go through a formality which formality is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose for the prosecution. In this backdrop the intended arrest of the petitioner by the local police has not been found by us to be above board.
3. For what has been discussed above this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is allowed and, consequently, Malik Muhammad Aslam petitioner is admitted to pre-arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court within a period of two weeks from today. MWA/M-31/SC Bail granted.