1976 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1976 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Farooqi, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ISMAIL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 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 1976 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Farooqi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ISMAIL‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- G. S. Chaudhry for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497 Bail--[Murder case]‑Accused in jail for 9 months and natural eye‑witnesses of occurrence as well as of recoveries of incriminating articles exonerating accused of charge‑‑‑Remaining witness not likely to improve prosecution case against accused‑‑ Accused granted bail, in circumstances.‑[Bail]. Muhammad Yamin for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S. 497 Bail--[Murder case]‑Accused in jail for 9 months and natural eye‑witnesses of occurrence as well as of recoveries of incriminating articles exonerating accused of charge‑‑‑Remaining witness not likely to improve prosecution case against accused‑‑ Accused granted bail, in circumstances.‑[Bail]. G. S. Chaudhry for Petitioner. Muhammad Yamin for the State. Muhammad Ismail petitioner is facing an enquiry along with some others in a case under section 148/302/307/149, P. P. C. for committing the murder of Noor Muhammad (deceased) on 23rd August 1972, in prosecution of the common object of their unlawful assembly while armed with guns, pistols and dangs. He is in the judicial lock‑up for the last about nine months as he was refused bail by the Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura. He has now moved this Court for the same as in the meanwhile two of the four eye‑witness named in the F. I. R. had exonerated him in their evidence which third had watered down his testimony in his cross‑examination and the evidence of the fourth was inconclusive about his liability for this offence, which has not been seriously contested before me. Even the two witness of the incriminating recoveries had also been declared hostile. The enquiry has however not concluded yet, but the evidence of thee remaining witnesses is not likely to improve the prosecution case. It was thus a clear case of further enquiry in the matter, I have, therefore, to accept this petition and direct that Muhammad Ismail petitioner shall be released from custody on his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000. (Rs. Ten thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A. C., Sheikhupura. Petition allowed.