2008L4333 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008L4333 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008L4333 (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 2008L4333 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008L4333 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rab Nawaz Khan Niazi for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
S.426
Control, of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(b)
Admittedly nothing had been recovered from the possession of accused who had been implicated only on a disclosure made by a co-accused during police custody
Prosecution evidence was that the accused was seen selling narcotics to his co-accused, but both of them had managed to slip away
Neither any passing of money on that occasion was seen, nor the narcotic substance being sold at that time was specified
Culpability of accused, thus, required serious re-consideration
Sentence of imprisonment of accused was also relatively short and main appeal was not likely to be fixed for regular hearing in the near future
Sentence of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was admitted to bail accordingly. Abdul Majid Chishti for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 2004. Through this miscellaneous petition Muhammad Iqbal petitioner-appellant has sought suspension of his sentence of imprisonment and release on bail during the pendency of his appeal before this Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court we have observed that admittedly nothing had been recovered from the petitioner's possession and the petitioner had been implicated only upon a disclosure made by a co-accused during police custody. Alam Khan DFC (P.W.6) had maintained before the learned trial Court that he and a Police Officer had seen the petitioner selling narcotics to his co-accused but both of them had managed to slip away and nothing had been recovered at that occasion. Admittedly the said witness had not seen any passing of money on that occasion and he had also not specified the narcotic substance being sold at that time. In these circumstances the question regarding culpability of the petitioner requires serious re-consideration at the time of hearing of the main appeal. Even to otherwise the sentence of imprisonment passed against the petitioner by the learned trial Court is relatively short and there is no likelihood of fixation of the main appeal for regular hearing in the near future. This miscellaneous petition is, therefore, allowed, the sentence of imprisonment passed by the learned trial Court against the petitioner is suspended and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q./M-314/L Sentence suspended.