1989 P Cr (PLP)
SHAMMAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J |
| Parties | SHAMMAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 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 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (SHAMMAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Lal Khan Baloch for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307 & 325/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused in jail for last six months‑‑No evidence recorded so far‑‑Co‑accused released on bail‑‑One of co‑accused found innocent by police‑‑Bail ' allowed in circumstances Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner seeks bail in the case registered against him at Police Station Bhawana, District Jhang, under section 307/325/34, P.P.C. on 1‑7‑1988, at the instance of Ahmad son of Manay Khan.
2. According to F.I.R. the petitioner armed with a hatchet, accompanied by his brother armed with a Phaura and Shah Nawaz armed with a Sota, had launched attack on Sher Muhammad brother of the complainant, after a Lalkara raised by him. The hatchet blow given by him had hit Sher Muhammad on the right side of head. The blow aimed by Shah Nawaz on the head of Sher Muhammad, struck him on the right shoulder. He fell down, whereafter the accused gave him more injuries.
3. Motive for the occurrence was a dispute which had taken place between the parties regarding the destruction of crop by cattle of the accused and the attempt made by Sher Muhammad to take the cattle to cattle‑pound.
4. The injured was found to have suffered six injuries, one of which was an incised wound on the left side of right ear, four were contusions and one was a complaint of pain. Injury No.2 on the top of right shoulder was declared grievous as the shoulder was found dislocated.
5. Bail is being sought by the petitioner on the grounds that he has been involved falsely in the case; that the injury which has been declared grievous, has not specifically been assigned to him; that co‑accused of the petitioner have been released on bail; that he is in jail for the last six months and that no evidence has been recorded so far. Finally, it has been pointed out that Ahmad co‑accused of the petitioner, was declared innocent during the investigation.
6. The fact of Ahmad co‑accused of the petitioner having been declared innocent, and that of the petitioner being in jail for the last six months, has not been denied by the A.S.I. who is present with record. He has also not denied that no evidence has been recorded so far in. the case: The contention of learned counsel that co‑accused of the petitioner have already been allowed bail, has also not been controverted. In the circumstances, I feel that a case for grant of bail‑to the petitioner is also made out. This petition, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, provided he furnished bail bond in the sum of Rs. twenty thousand with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Chiniot/trial Magistrate. S.A./S‑340/L Bail allowed.