MLD 2003

2003 PLP 1716 (MLD)

ROSHAN DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2003-February-19
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2003 PLP 1716 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties ROSHAN DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1716 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1716 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1716 (MLD) (ROSHAN DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmad Chaudhry for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34

Bail, grant of-- Further inquiry

No overt act qua the deceased had been ascribed to accused in commission of alleged crime

Accused had been found innocent in two investigations

Name of accused had been placed in Column No.2 of the report under S.173, Cr.P.C. and no recovery had been effected from him

Case against accused was open to further inquiry covered under subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.

Accused was stated to be previous non-convict

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

Abdul Hamid Khokhar for the State. Date of hearing: 19th February, 2003. Petitioner Roshan Din through the instant petition seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.188, dated 2-11-2002, under section 302/34, P.P.C. Police Station Fareed Nagar, District Pak pattan Sharif.

2. Briefly the prosecution case is that on 2-11-2002 at about 3-00 p.m. Muhammad Anwar armed with pistol alongwith Roshan Din (petitioner) and Jaffar alias Zafar in furtherance of their common intention have committed Qatl-i-Amd of deceased Mst. Munawar Shehzadi. Muhammad Anwar had fired at her with his pistol hitting on her right arm near the shoulder while Roshan Din (petitioner), thereafter, took him away towards Railway Station on his motorcycle. Mst. Munawar Shehzadi succumbed to her injuries in Civil Hospital, Pakpattan Sharif. The motive behind the occurrence is that Muhammad Anwar had illicit relations with her and had persuaded her to have divorce from her husband and to marry him. On her refusal they have committed the above act.

3. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that he had been falsely roped in; that in two successive investigations he has been found innocent and his name has been placed in Column No.2 of the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. that no recovery of motorcycle was effected from him; and that he is behind the bars and a previous non convict.

4. Conversely the learned counsel for the State has though opposed the petition but has conceded that in two investigations i.e. one conducted by Muhammad Aman Ullah S.-I. and the other by Ghulam Abbas, Inspector/S.H.O. of the said Police Station, he has been found innocent and their investigation was verified by Muhammad Zulfiqar, D.S.P. (Investigation), Pakpattan Sharif and his name has been placed in Column No.2 of their report under section 173, Cr.P.C. that no recovery was effected from him.

5. I have carefully considered the submissions made from both the sides with the help of available record.

6. The fact remains that no overt act qua the deceased has been ascribed to him (petitioner) in the commission of the crime alleged. He has also been found innocent in two investigations conducted by aforesaid police officials and verified by D.S.P. (Investigation), Pakpattan Sharif. Admittedly his name has been placed in column No.2 of the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. and no recovery has been effected from him. In these circumstances, I am of the view that his case is open to further inquiry and as such the same is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. He is behind the bars and statea to be previous non-convict. I, therefore, accept this petition and admit him to bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50.000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Pakpattan Sharif/trial Court. H.B.T./R-252/L Bail granted.