2007 PLP 468 (MLD)
NAZIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 468 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NAZIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 468 (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 2007 PLP 468 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 468 (MLD) (NAZIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Hasham Raza Shamsi and Mian Ghulam Rasool for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 337-A(i), L(ii)
Two persons were murdered and one was injured in the court premises
Accused, who were members of unlawful assembly, were named in F.I.R.
Complainant who was injured during occurrence, was medically examined
Offence against accused falling within the prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C., no case for grant of bail was made out.
Judgment & Decree
KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.
This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8825-B-2005 titled as Nazir Ahmad v. State and Criminal Miscellaneous No.8923-B-2005 tilted as Muhammad Ramzan v. State.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for Nazir Ahmad petitioner that petitioner did not cause any injury to the deceased, that simple injury under section 337-A(i), L-(ii) is attributed to the petitioner, that it will be seen at the time of trial that the petitioner was member of unlawful assembly that according to investigation, though petitioner was present at the place of occurrence but was empty-handed.
3. Learned counsel for Ramzan petitioner submits that according to report under section 173, Cr.P.C. though he was present at the spot but was empty-handed and he ran away from the spot; that no overt act is attributed to the petitioner and that case of petitioner is of further inquiry falling under subsection 2 of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. On the other hand learned State counsel submits that petitioners along with their co-accused came at the spot and they committed the offence; that they have been found guilty aad have been placed in Column No.3 of the challan and that the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. In the instant case two persons namely Anwar Ali and Faryad Ali were murdered while Akhtar Ali was injured in the Court premises. The petitioners are named in the F.I.R. They were member of unlawful assembly. The complainant was injured during the occurrence and he was medically examined. As far as report under section 173, Cr.P.C. is concerned, petitioner Ramzan was present at the spot and was empty-handed, this finding is not binding upon this Court. The offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. No case for bail is made out. Both these petitions stand dismissed. H.B.T./N-110/L Bail Refused.