2016 PLP 2048 (SCMR)
GHULAM ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2016 PLP 2048 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM ABBAS — 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 2016 PLP 2048 (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 2016 PLP 2048 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 PLP 2048 (SCMR) (GHULAM ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik M. Akram Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.2.
- Malik Muhammad Imtiaz Mahl, Advocate Supreme Court along with Petitioner.
- 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2, learned Law Officer and after perusing the record with their assistance, it has been observed that the incident was first reported to the police by Umar Hayat and FIR No. 382/15 was registered. Thereafter, cross-version in the said FIR was got registered on the statement of Asghar Ali on 26.10.2015 against the petitioner and several others. As per the cross-version, the allegation against the present petitioner is that he gave two Sota blows on the head and the back side of shoulder of Ghazanfar, brother of complainant of the cross-version. However, during the course of investigation, as confirmed by the learned Additional Prosecutor General, Punjab, the police found that petitioner did not cause any injury to Ghazanfar, as alleged in the cross-version, rather he had a scuffle with Muzaffar Hayat and the injuries allegedly sustained by said Muzaffar Hayat are simple in nature. Admittedly, it is a case of two versions and possibility of false implication of the petitioner cannot be ruled out. It is to be determined by the learned trial Court after elaborate evaluation of the evidence to be recorded by it as to which party was the aggressor and which party was aggressed upon.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order of the Lahore High court Lahore dated 16.2.2016 passed in Crl. Misc. No. 1249-B of 2016)
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 148, 149, 337-A(ii), 337-F(i) & 337-H(2)
Rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, shajjah-i-mudihah, ghayr-jaifah damiyah, hurt by rash or negligent act, other hurt
Allegation against the accused was that he gave two sota blows on the head and shoulder of complainant's brother, however, during the course of investigation, police found that accused did not cause any injury to complainant's brother, rather he had a scuffle with another person who sustained simple injuries
Admittedly, present case was a case of two versions and possibility of false implication of the accused could not be ruled out
After elaborate evaluation of the evidence, which was yet to be recorded, the Trial Court had to determine as to which party was the aggressor and which party was aggressed upon
Accused was allowed bail before arrest accordingly. Malik Muhammad Imtiaz Mahl, Advocate Supreme Court along with Petitioner. Mazhar Sher Awan, Additional P.-G. and M. Manzoor, SI for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.
The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in cross-version recorded in case FIR No. 382 of 2015 dated 20.10.2015, offences under sections 337-A(ii), 337-F(i), 337-H(ii), 337-L(ii), 148, 149, P.P.C., registered at P.S. Saddar Jhang.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2, learned Law Officer and after perusing the record with their assistance, it has been observed that the incident was first reported to the police by Umar Hayat and FIR No. 382/15 was registered. Thereafter, cross-version in the said FIR was got registered on the statement of Asghar Ali on 26.10.2015 against the petitioner and several others. As per the cross-version, the allegation against the present petitioner is that he gave two Sota blows on the head and the back side of shoulder of Ghazanfar, brother of complainant of the cross-version. However, during the course of investigation, as confirmed by the learned Additional Prosecutor General, Punjab, the police found that petitioner did not cause any injury to Ghazanfar, as alleged in the cross-version, rather he had a scuffle with Muzaffar Hayat and the injuries allegedly sustained by said Muzaffar Hayat are simple in nature. Admittedly, it is a case of two versions and possibility of false implication of the petitioner cannot be ruled out. It is to be determined by the learned trial Court after elaborate evaluation of the evidence to be recorded by it as to which party was the aggressor and which party was aggressed upon.
3. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is converted into appeal and the same is allowed. Consequently, Ghulam Abbas petitioner is allowed bail before arrest in the cross-version of FIR No 382 of 2015, subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousands only), with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. MWA/G-13/SC Bail granted.