2005 P Cr (PLP)
AMANULLAH — Applicant Versus ALAMZEB and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AMANULLAH — Applicant Versus ALAMZEB and 3 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 P Cr (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 2005 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 P Cr (PLP) (AMANULLAH — Applicant Versus ALAMZEB and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mrs. Neelam Khan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324, 435 & 34
Accused was directly nominated in the promptly lodged report for commission of crime
Specific role of firing had been attributed to accused which had culminated in injuries to the complainant
Sections of law under which accused was charged were non-bailable and fell within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Grant of bail was discretionary relief which could only be extended to accused about whom the Court was satisfied that he was not connected with commission of offence at all
Merely on ground that case of accused was of further inquiry without any legal basis, would not mean that accused should be released on bail
Every case, more or less, was of further inquiry which did not mean that every accused should be extended concession of bail
Accused was not entitled to concession of bail
Bail granted to accused by Trial Court was withdrawn and accused was ordered to be taken into custody to be dealt with in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
Alamzeb respondent stands involved along with others in case F.I.R. No.11 dated 9-1-2005, registered at Police Station Matta under sections 324/435/34, P.P.C. at the instance of complainant Amanullah. The precise allegations against the respondent are that he fired with his kalashnikov, as a result of which the complainant sustained injury on the nose. The respondent and his accomplices moved an application before Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Qazi, Matta, Swat for their release on bail, who vide order, dated 23-2-2005 granted bail to the respondent and his companion Muhammad Zamin, but declined the same to Momin Khan. Feeling aggrieved the complainant, moved the Court of Session for cancellation of bail, but the same was rejected vide order, dated 7-3-2005 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Matta, Swat.
2. The complainant has filed instant application under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respondent per the impugned order dated 23-2-2005.
3. I have heard at length the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties with reference to the material on file.
4. The respondent is one of the accused persons directly nominated in the promptly lodged report for the commission of crime. A specific role of firing has been attributed to him which has culminated in injuries to the complainant. The sections of law for which respondent is charged, are non-bailable and fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Needless to emphasize that grant of bail is a discretionary relief which can only be extended to the accused person about whom the Court is satisfied that he is not connected with the commission of the offence at all. Merely, on the ground that the case of the accused is of further inquiry without any legal basis would not mean that the accused should be released on bail. Every case, more or less, is of further inquiry which does not mean that every accused should be extended the concession of bail. Sardar Munir Ahmad Dogar v. The State PLD 2004 SC
822. Pursuant to above, this Court is of the prima facie view that the respondent was not entitled to the concession of bail. The application is accepted and resultantly the bail granted to him by the learned Additional B Sessions Judge is hereby withdrawn and he shall be taken into custody, to be dealt with in accordance with law. H.B.T./400/P Bail cancelled.