P L D 1997 Peshawar 11 (PLP)
MAZULLAH KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1997 Peshawar 11 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Ajmal, J |
| Parties | MAZULLAH KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1997 Peshawar 11 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1997 Peshawar 11 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Ajmal, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1997 Peshawar 11 (PLP) (MAZULLAH KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Saleem Khan for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 17th August, 1996.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337‑F(v)/34‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑ Accused had been charged for having caused stone injury to the complainant without specifying its seat and locale and it could not be ascertained at bail stage as to which. of three injuries was caused by the accused as all of them had been caused by 'blunt weapons‑‑‑Such kind of hurt apparently fell under section 337‑F(v), P.P.C. which was punishable ‑with Daman and five years' R.I. as Tazir‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Habib‑ur‑Rehman Afridi and Rasool Khan Khattak for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Mazullah Khan accused petitioner, after failing to obtain bail from the learned Courts below had come up to this Court for the same relief in case F.I.R. No.248 dated 21‑5‑1996, registered at Police Station Saddar, Kohat under section 337‑D/34, P.P.C. 2 According to the F. I.R.,‑Abdul Qasim injured complainant, on the day of occurrence at about 15‑30 hours, was present near his house alongwith his grandson Fazal Hakim, when Mazullah Khan and Wajib Khan came and asked him as to why he deposed against them in the Court of Civil Judge. They exchanged hot words, in consequence whereof Mazullah Khan hurled a stone on the complainant and Wajib Khan gave him an axe blow, with which he got injured. 3 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case with their assistance. 4 The petitioner had been charged for causing stone injury to the complainant but the seat and locale of the said ‑injury was not specified, hence it cannot be ascertained at dais stage as to which of the three injuries, was caused by the petitioner as all of them have been caused by the blunt means. This kind of hurt would fall under clause (v) of section 337‑F, P.P.C. which entail the punishment of Daman and may also be imposed imprisonment which may extend to five years as Ta'zir, as provided under section 337‑F(V), P.P.C.. The reading of the above section would manifest that the main punishment for the offence is the payment of Daman as it is mandatory in nature while the imposition of imprisonment under Ta'zir is discretionary. After trial, under subsection (2) of section 337‑Y, in case of non‑payment of Daman the convict can be kept in jail until its recovery from him, or he can be released on bail if he furnishes security equal to the amount of Daman to the satisfaction of the Court. In punishment under Ta'zir is concerned, ii can be enforced under subsection (2) of section 337‑N which reads as under:‑‑ 337-N (1) . (a) .. ... ... ... .. ,.. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... .. (b) ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... .... ... .... .... ..... (c) ... ... .... .... .... .. (d) ... ... .... .... ... ... ... ... .... .... ... ... ... ... . (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this chapter in all cases of hurt, the Court may, having regard to the kind of hurt caused by him in addition to payment of Arsh, award Ta'zir to an offender who is previous convict, habitual or hardened desperate or dangerous criminal . " In view of the above legal position, the petitioner can be released on bail provided he furnishes security equivalent to the Daman amount, which tentatively is fixed at Rs.20,
000. Consequently the petitioner is allowed bail provided he furnishes bail bonds allowed bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa Magistrate who shall see that the sureties are reliable, local and men of‑means. The accused petitioner shall also deposit Rs.20,000 in cash as 'Daman' to be paid on determination to the complainant on the conclusion of the trial and should also deposit passport which shall remain in the custody of the Court till decision of the case. N.H.Q./2,030/P Bail allowed.