YLR 2004

2004 PLP 2126 (YLR)

Hafiz MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.7246‑B of 2003, decided on 12th January, 2004.
Honorable Judges
Sh. Abdur Rashid, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2004 PLP 2126 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Sh. Abdur Rashid, J
Parties Hafiz MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 2126 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 2126 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sh. Abdur Rashid, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 2126 (YLR) (Hafiz MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Ch. Abdul Waheed for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing: 12th January, 2004.

Headnotes / Summary

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.498‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.324‑‑‑Interim bail, confirmation of‑‑ Injuries sustained by accused in the occurrence had not been explained in F.I.R.‑‑‑Had the accused and his co- accused inflicted injuries on the person of victim ladies with sticks and fists, then only one abrasion would not have been caused and victims would have sustained injuries of graver nature‑‑‑One of victims/prosecution witnesses had not sustained any injury at all in the occurrence‑‑‑Story as narrated in F.I.R., did not find support from medical evidence and did not appear to be true‑‑ Injuries sustained by accused which had been suppressed by complainant, were graver than those suffered by complainant side‑‑‑Case of accused and facts alleged in occurrence, being matter of further inquiry, interim bail already allowed to accused, was confirmed. Javed Iqbal Rana for the Complainant. Malik Mehmood Ahmad Rehan for the State.

Judgment & Decree

According to the prosecution allegations on 14‑10‑2003 at about 2‑00 p.m. while Muhammad Aslam complainant was passing through this lane the petitioner alongwith his co‑accused Naveed being inebriated were present in the lane and were pestering the passersby and they also abused the complainant and attempted to grapple with him. The complainant then proceeded to inform about the said incident to his uncle and in the meanwhile, the petitioner alongwith This co‑accused being armed with fire‑arm, entered the house of the complainant and caused injuries with stick and fists to Mst. Rasoolan Bibi mother and Mst. Fazilat Bibi wife of the complainant.

2. According to Medico‑legal report, only Mst. Rasoolan Bibi had been injured and she received only one abrasion 1 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. on the bridge of nose which is skin deep and then she complained of pain in the little finger of left hand.

3. It is contended on behalf of the complainant that in fact the complainant party had brawl with the petitioner and caused him injuries and to set up a defence a false case had been lodged against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced copy of Medico legal report, whereby, the petitioner had sustained four injuries on his person.

4. The injuries sustained by the petitioner in the occurrence have not been explained in the F.I.R. In case, the petitioner and his co‑accused had inflicted injuries on the person of Mst. Rasoolan Bibi and Mst. Fazilat Bibi with sticks and fists, then only one abrasion would not have been caused and the said P.Ws. would have sustained injuries of graver nature. Mst. Fazilat Bibi had not sustained any injury at all in the occurrence. The story as narrated in the F.I.R., thus does not find support from the medical evidence and does not appear, to be to whole truth. The complainant side has also suppressed the injuries of the petitioner which are graver than those suffered by the complainant side. Therefore, the case of the petitioner and the facts alleged in the occurrence are a matter of further inquiry.

5. The interim bail already allowed to the petitioner is confirmed. H.B.T./M‑302/L Interim bail confirmed.