MLD 1992

1992 PLP 1854 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD SALEH alias PATHANA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Crl. M. No.705‑B of 1992, decided on 21st March, 1992.
Honorable Judges
Ijaz Nisar, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP 1854 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Ijaz Nisar, J
Parties MUHAMMAD SALEH alias PATHANA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 1854 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 1854 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Nisar, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 1854 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD SALEH alias PATHANA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Shah Ahmad Khan Baloch for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused was behind the bars since about six months and admittedly there was no public witness to the alleged recovery‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Akhtar Masood Khan for the State.

Judgment & Decree

‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused was behind the bars since about six months and admittedly there was no public witness to the alleged recovery‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Shah Ahmad Khan Baloch for Petitioner. Akhtar Masood Khan for the State. Muhammad Saleh petitioner was arrested on 7‑9‑1991 on the allegation of possessing an unlicenced 7 m.m. rifle.

2. It is contended that the case is based on false allegations and except for police, there is no other public witness to the alleged recovery.

3. The petitioner is behind the bars since about 6 months. Admittedly, there is no public witness to the alleged recovery. I, therefore, admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.15,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Kharian. N.H.Q./M‑320/L Bail allowed.