1994 PLP 2059 (MLD)
SARFRAZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 2059 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SARFRAZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 2059 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 2059 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 2059 (MLD) (SARFRAZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Munir Ahmad Gill for Petitioner.
- Hafiz Muhammad Yousaf for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Bail, cancellation of--Specific shot to the deceased was ascribed to the accused
Local Police had found the accused innocent but Range Crimes Branch held him to have participated in the occurrence armed with fire-arm
Deceased had four fire-arm injuries and the occurrence having taken place in broad day, identification of accused was not difficult
Bail granted to accused by Sessions Court was cancelled in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
The respondent was granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge only on the ground that he had been found innocent during investigation by the local police as well as Range Crimes Faisalabad, so his case was considered as of further inquiry.
2. The factual position has not been correctly appreciated by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
3. The occurrence took place at 8-00 a.m. and the matter was reported to the police the same day at 12-00 noon. According to the F.I.R. Sarni Ullah Tar'q, Zubair Ahmad, Arif and Munir Ahmad alias Maulvi alias Falak Sher (now a proclaimed offender) armed with guns and respondent with a cazb~e assaulted. Specific shot to the deceased is ascribed to the respondent.
4. The local police found Sami Ullah Tariq, Zubair Ahmad and the present respondent as innocent but the Range Crime Branch have concluded Zubair Ahmad only innocent but with respect to respondent and Sarni U they have definite conclusion that they were present in the occurrence armed with fire-arms and participated in the occurrence. The only conclusion different to the F.I.R. is that Shakil Ahmad respondent was armed with a gun and not carbine, as given in the F.I.R.
5. In the circumstances of the case i.e. broad day occurrence, no difficulty in the identification, there being 4 fire-arm injuries, the investigation now being that the respondent was also concerned in the occurrence, there was no ground to grant bail to him. The petition is accepted and the bail granted to the respondent is hereby cancelled. However, if during further investigation some different conclusion is reached, the bail may be repeated in the Sessions Court. N.H.Q./S-492/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail cancelled.