1994SCMR1678 (PLP)
NAZIR AHMED ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus GHULAM RASUL and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1994SCMR1678 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman, Saleem Akhtar and Manzoor Hussain Sial, JJ |
| Parties | NAZIR AHMED ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus GHULAM RASUL and others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994SCMR1678 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994SCMR1678 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Saleem Akhtar and Manzoor Hussain Sial, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994SCMR1678 (PLP) (NAZIR AHMED ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus GHULAM RASUL and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Faiz Muhammad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana Maqbool Ahmad Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 8th January, 1994.
- 4. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that Ghulam Rasul had motive as he suspected Muhammad Ibrahim deceased having illicit relation with his wife. He, however, was unable to controvert the factum of ineffective firing attributed to the respondents no crime empty found from the place of f firing and the occurrence had taken place at the dead of night. Learned counsel was also unable to satisfactorily account for the delay of 75 days for filing this petition against the impugned order.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 21‑3‑1993, in Cr.Misc. 594‑B of 1993). Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 302/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Cancellation of bail‑‑‑Accused had been attributed only ineffective firing‑‑‑No crime empty had been recovered from the place of firing‑‑‑Occurrence had taken place at the dead of night when identification of assailants was difficult‑‑‑Delay of 75 days for filing the petition was not satisfactorily accounted for‑‑‑High Court's order releasing the accused on bail called for no interference in circumstances‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J: ‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against order dated 21‑3‑1993, of the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, whereby he released respondents Nos. 1 and 2 on bail pending decision of the case against them..,
2. Nazir Ahmad petitioner lodged F.I.R. on 16‑2‑1992, under section 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station, Piplan, District Mianwali, wherein alleged that on the night between 15/16th February, 1992, his brother Muhammad Ibrarim was murdered by a gun‑shot fired by Muhammad Amin accused. The respondents were also alleged to have participated in the firing.
3. The learned Lahore 'High Court allowed the respondents to be released on bail on the ground that only ineffective firing was attributed to them, no crime empty was recovered from the spot and the occurrence had taken place at the mid‑night when identification of assailants was difficult.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that Ghulam Rasul had motive as he suspected Muhammad Ibrahim deceased having illicit relation with his wife. He, however, was unable to controvert the factum of ineffective firing attributed to the respondents no crime empty found from the place of f firing and the occurrence had taken place at the dead of night. Learned counsel was also unable to satisfactorily account for the delay of 75 days for filing this petition against the impugned order.
5. In our view the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court releasing the respondents on bail for the grounds mentioned therein calls for no interference. This petition is consequently dismissed and leave refused. N.H.Q./N‑378/S Leave refused.