SCMR 2006

2006 PLP 150 (SCMR)

ZAFAR IQBAL — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ILYAS and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Cr. P. L. A. No. 330 of 2005, decided on 21st November, 2005.
Honorable Judges
Tassadduq Hussain Jillani and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 150 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Tassadduq Hussain Jillani and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, JJ
Parties ZAFAR IQBAL — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ILYAS and another — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 150 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 150 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tassadduq Hussain Jillani and Saiyed Saeed Ashhad, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 150 (SCMR) (ZAFAR IQBAL — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ILYAS and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Abdus Saleem, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing: 21st November, 2005.
  • M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan dated 26-7-2005 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.988/B of 2005).

S. 497(5)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/380/452/148/149

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)

Bail, cancellation of

Accused had not appeared in Court despite service

Accused was specifically named in the F.I.R. with a definite role to have come to the spot armed with a rifle and to have fired at the deceased and also to have fractured his left arm with a butt blow

Police, prima facie, had no tenable ground to disbelieve the injured witnesses

Case of accused in view of the allegations levelled against him squarely fell within the mischief of S.302, P.P.C.

Impugned order granting bail to accused, thus, was not sustainable

Petition for leave to appeal was consequently converted into appeal and allowed and the bail allowed to accused by High Court was cancelled accordingly. M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Judgment & Decree

TASSADDUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.

The petitioner/ complainant (in case F.I.R. No.336 of 2004, dated 19-11-2004 registered under sections 302/380/452/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Makhdoom Rasheed District Multan) seeks cancellation of bail granted to Muhammad Ilyas respondent by the High Court vide order dated 9-2-2005.

2. The prosecution story briefly stated is that on the fateful day and time when the complainant was visiting his cousin Muhammad Akram deceased, respondent armed with rifle, Manzoor co-accused armed with rifle along with eight others entered the premises. Manzoor raised Lalkara that Akram be taught a lesson which was followed by fire from him which hit Muhammad Akram on his eye and nose and he fell down whereupon respondent Ilyas fired at him which hit him on the right cheek. It was further alleged that respondent gave a butt blow to Muhammad Akram in consequence of which his left arm was fractured. During the occurrence four other persons from the complainant side also received injuries.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks cancellation of bail on the ground that the respondent was specifically named in the F.I.R. with a definite role attributed to him of having armed with deadly weapon and of having caused injuries on the person of the deceased and there was no tenable ground to grant him bail. Further contended that the respondent also has previous criminal record.

4. The learned counsel for the State supported the petition as according' to him there was sufficient evidence implicating the respondent; that the ocular account consisting of four injured witnesses was corroborated by the medical evidence inasmuch as injuries Nos.3. and 4 on the person of the deceased are attributed to the respondent.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the State and have also perused the record.

6. Muhammad Ilyas has not appeared despite service. He is specifically named hi the F.I.R. to have come to the spot armed with a rifle and to have fired at the deceased. It is further alleged that he caused a butt blow on the person of the deceased in consequence of which his left arm was fractured. Prima facie police had no tenable ground to disbelieve the injured witnesses. In view of the allegations levelled, the case of the respondent squarely falls within the mischief of section 302, P.P.C. that being so, the impugned order granting bail to the respondent Muhammad Ilyas cannot be sustained. Resultantly this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The order dated 26-7-2005 passed by a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.988/B of 2005 is set aside. N.H.Q./Z-40/S??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal accepted.