2006 PLP 2876 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2876 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 2876 (YLR)?
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 2876 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Sakhi Hussain Bokhari, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2876 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Zikria Sheikh and Ch. Muhammad Javaid Iqbal for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Ss.337-F(vi), 337-L(ii), 148 & 149
Allegation against accused was that he along with his co-accused caused injuries on persons of complainant and prosecution witness
F. I. R. revealed that accused caused injuries on the right hand of prosecution witness with a 'Sota'
Medico-legal Report showed that fracture was on the right hand of prosecution witness
.Accused lead failed to show any mala fide on the part of complainant or police
Case being not fit for grant of pre-arrest bail to accused, Petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Pervaiz Akbar for the State with Muhammad Rafique, S.-I. along with Record.
Judgment & Decree
SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.
The petitioner has applied for pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.26 of 2006, dated 24-1-2006 under sections 337- F(vi), 337-L(ii), 148, 149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station, Chutiana, District T.T. Singh.
2. As per F.I.R. on 19-1-2006 petitioner and his co-accused while armed with different weapons caused injuries on the persons of Iftikhar Anjum, P.W. and Ghulam Mustafa, complainant. The case was registered on 24-1-2006. Hence this bail application.
3. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Further submits that petitioner was not present at the scene of occurrence at the relevant time. He contended that according to report of Medical Board injury on the person of Iftikhar Anjum, P.W. is self-suffered, hence, the case of petitioner is that of further enquiry and he deserves concession of bail.
5. On the other hand learned counsel for the complainant as well as State have opposed this application on the grounds that petitioner is named in F.I.R.; that specific role has been attributed to him; that he caused injuries on the person of Iftikhar Anjum, P.W. with a 'Sota' as a result of which his hand was fractured and that weapon of offence is yet be recovered from him.
6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties with care. As mentioned above the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his co-accused caused injuries on the persons of Ghulam Mustafa, complainant and Iftikhar Anjum, P.W. As per F.I.R. petitioner caused injuries on the right hand of Iftikhar Anjum, P.W. with a sota'. According to M.L.R. there is fracture on the right hand of Iftikhar Anjum, P.W. The petitioner has failed to show any mala fide on the part of complainant or police. In these circumstances I do not find it a fit case for grant or pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and application brought by him is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./M-393/L Bail refused.