2004 PLP 1538 (YLR)
NIAZAL alias NIAZ ALI‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE ‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2004 PLP 1538 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Nabi Soomro, J |
| Parties | NIAZAL alias NIAZ ALI‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE ‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 1538 (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 2004 PLP 1538 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ghulam Nabi Soomro, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 1538 (YLR) (NIAZAL alias NIAZ ALI‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE ‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 23rd December, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302‑‑‑Bail, refusal of‑‑‑Bail was sought by accused on ground of age contending that on the date of incident he was aged 14 years and 8 months‑‑‑Medical certificate of accused produced on record had shown that age of accused was more than 16 years on date of incident‑‑‑Accused had failed to show as to why age of accused as per medical certificate should not be given preference‑‑‑Age certificate produced by accused stood belied by Medical Certificate which was issued by a Radiologist Accused had confessed the crime, as an act of chivalry, before Magistrate through his judicial confession‑‑‑Accused was not entitled to bail‑‑‑Bail application of accused was dismissed, in circumstances. 1970 SCMR 30; PLJ 1975 Cr.C. (Karachi) 511; 1983 SCMR 1001; 1996 PCr.LJ 1171 and 1997 SCMR 1381 ref. Imdad Hussain Abbasi for Applicant. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Ismail Bhutto for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd December, 2003. The bail application of the applicant, involved in case of murder (of his wife), is pressed only on the ground of age. He is stated to be 14 years and 8 months on the date of incident, which took place on 1‑3‑2000 at early dawn time. The applicant is alleged to have killed his bride in his house on the first night of marriage, scaring away the P. Ws. by pronouncing her as Kari with a person, by firing from his gun at her, who died on the spot. The applicant has made a judicial confession. The medical certificate shows that the applicant was 19/20 years of age on 26‑11‑2002. Thus, even, per medical certificate, the applicant's age would be more than 16 years on the date of incident. Mr. Abbasi learned counsel for the applicant has failed to show why the age as per medical certificate should not be given preference. He has however, placed before me the following case‑law only, which in my view does not apply in the present case. 1970 SCMR 30; PLJ 1975 Cr.C. (Karachi) 511; 1983 SCMR 1001; 1996 PCr.LJ 1171 and 1997 SCMR 1381. Mr. M.I. Bhutto learned counsel appearing for the State, has opposed the bail application by stating that the applicant is an adult, married person. His age certificate stands belied by the medical certificate, which is issued by a Radiologist. The applicant has confessed the crime, as an act of chivalry, before the Magistrate through his Judicial confession. In the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant does not seem to be entitled to bail. His bail application is, therefore, dismissed. By a short order dated 23‑12‑2003 the applicant's bail application was dismissed for the reasons as aforesaid. The learned trial Court is however, directed to conclude the applicant's case expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months. H.B.T./N‑13/K Bail application dismissed.