1985 PLP 619 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD YAQOOB — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1985 PLP 619 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Hamoodur Rahman, C.J., Muhammad Afzal Cheema and Abdul Kadir Shaikh, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YAQOOB — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 619 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 619 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Hamoodur Rahman, C.J., Muhammad Afzal Cheema and Abdul Kadir Shaikh, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 619 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD YAQOOB — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
- Date of hearing: 7th January, 1975.
- S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 13th August, 1974, in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2907/B of 1974).
Art. 185(3)--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), 5.498 Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34--Bail--F.I.R. clearly alleging that second fire was made by accused (petitioner)--High Court, held, was justified in refusing bail and coming to conclusion that prima facie, common intention, as alleged, was there and S.34, P.P.C. was applicable--Leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 7th January, 1975. HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J.‑‑ This is a petition for special leave to appeal from an order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dismissing a petition for pre‑arrest bail in limine. The petitioner and two others, Ghulam Mustafa and Ghulam Rasul are accused in a case under section 302/34, P.P.C. registered at Police Station, Bhara Khan, on the 4th March, 1974. The petitioner and Ghulam Rasul were arrested on 10th March, 1974, and Ghulam Mustafa was arrested on the 15th of April, 1974. Two separate bail applications were filed before the learned Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, one by the petitioner and the other by Ghulam Mustafa. The latter was granted bail as his plea of alibi supported by a certificate produced from the Commanding Officer of his Unit, in which he was Lance Naik, prima facie, showed that he was present on duty in the Camp on the day of occurrence. The petitioner's application was, however, rejected, even though in the F . I . R . only a Lalkara was attributed to him. The petitioner then moved the High Court for bail. The learned Judge in the High Court, after perusing the F. I. R. came to the conclusion that apart from the Lalkara, it was also alleged in the F.I.R. that the petitioner himself had fired a shot at the deceased, but the shot missed the deceased. In the circumstances the provisions of section 34, P.P.C., were, prima facie, attracted and there were reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner was guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition ha contended that the F.I.R. did not even make out a case against the petitioner. We have also perused the F.I.R. and do not find any substance in the contention of the le4rned counsel. F.I.R. clearly alleges that the petitioner, which passed over the shop of Mistri Nazir, made second fire. The High Court, therefore, was right in coming to the conclusion that prima facie, the common intention, as alleged, was there and as such section 34, P.P.C. was applicable. We see no reason to interfere. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed. M . Z . M . Petition dismissed.