1970 P Cr (PLP)
NASIM alias SEEMA AND 5 OTHERS-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1970 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Shaukat Ali, J |
| Parties | NASIM alias SEEMA AND 5 OTHERS-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Shaukat Ali, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 P Cr (PLP) (NASIM alias SEEMA AND 5 OTHERS-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Asaf Ranjha for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324 & 326-Grievous hurt --Bone cut short of fracture or dislocation-Not grievous hurt ' Incised wound with cut on bone underneath-Bone not fractured-Offence, in circumstances, held, fell under S. 324 and not under S. 326, Penal Code. Asmat Ullah v. State P L D 1961 Lah. 506 rel.
Judgment & Decree
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324 & 326-Grievous hurt --Bone cut short of fracture or dislocation-Not grievous hurt ' Incised wound with cut on bone underneath-Bone not fractured-Offence, in circumstances, held, fell under S. 324 and not under S. 326, Penal Code. Asmat Ullah v. State P L D 1961 Lah. 506 rel. Muhammad Asaf Ranjha for Petitioners. This is, a petition for bail under section 498, Cr. P. C.
2. The facts are these. On receipt of the copy of the medical report No. 226/69 dated 21/22-10-1969 a case under section 326/149 read with section 148, P. P.-C. was registered against the petitioners and two others namely, Ghulam Nabi and Bashir at Police Station Bhagtanwala, District Sargodha, on the report of Rodamal on 22-10-1969. In the course of investiga tion Ghulam Nabi and Bashir were found innocent by the police and it is stated that the case against them has been cancelled. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that Ghulam Nabi who has been found innocent by the police has been assigned specific part in the F. I. R. He further argued that the only injury which has been described to be grievous is an incised wound 2 '' x x bone underneath cut on the right outer and back side of right hand at the little finger. According to the learned counsel as there was no fracture or dislocation the mere cut of the bone cannot be described as a grievous. Reliance was placed on Asmat Ullah v. State (P L D 1961 Lah. 506) where his Lordship Mr. Justice Jamil Hussain Rizvi (as he then was) observed that unless a bone is cut through and through a mere cut in the bone would not make the injury as grievous. It is the fracture or dislocation of a bone which fall under the definition of a grievous hurt. On examining the medical, report, I find that there is no indication that there was a fracture under this injury. Consequently, the offence of the accused fell under section 324, P. P. C. which is bailable.
3. Considering all the circumstances of the case I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. I admit the petitioners to bail provided they furnish security in the sum of Rs. 5,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A. D. M., Sargodha trial Magistrate. Bail allowed.