MLD 2006

2006 PLP 829 (MLD)

DABEER ABBAS alias PAPPU SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Misc. No.8148/B of 2005, decided on 29th November, 2005.
Honorable Judges
Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 829 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J
Parties DABEER ABBAS alias PAPPU SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 829 (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 2006 PLP 829 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 829 (MLD) (DABEER ABBAS alias PAPPU SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Jamshad Sadiq Alvi for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing: 29th November, 2005.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 34

Bail, grant of

Accused though was named in F.I.R., but no specific role of causing injuries to deceased had been attributed to him and only a general allegation was made against accused that he along with his co-accused had given beating to deceased

Post-mortem report, on the other hand, had revealed that only one sharp-edged weapon injury was found on the person of deceased

Delay in post-mortem examination could not be explained

Nothing was recovered from accused during investigation and investigation to the extent of accused was complete and he was no more required for that purpose

Incarceration of accused would not serve any purpose

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Rana Muhammad Tayyab for the State.

Judgment & Decree

MIAN MUHAMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J

Dabeer Abbas ,alias Pappu Shah petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 673 of 2005, dated 16-7-2005 registered under section 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station, Shafiqabad, Lahore.

2. In brief the story of the prosecution as penned in the F.I.R. is that on 16-7-2005 at 6.00 a.m. petitioner who was armed with Chhurri along with other co-accused who were also armed with sharp-edged weapons, in furtherance of their common intention, had committed the murder of Nazir Ahmad. Allegedly, at the relevant time petitioner and his co-accused had given beating to the deceased and co-accused of the petitioner namely Tanveer alias Mushka gave Chhurri blow to Nazir in abdomen as a result of which he died later on in the hospital.

3. Petitioner was arrested on 12-8-2005 and his bail application was dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Lahore vide order dated 8-10-2005. Hence, the instant petition.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at some length and going through the record, I have observed that though petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but no specific role of causing injuries to the deceased has been attributed to him and there is only a general allegation against the petitioner that he along with his co-accused had given beating to the deceased but on the other hand, the post-mortem report reveals that there was only one sharp-edged weapon injury on the person of the deceased. I have also observed that this occurrence took place on 16-7-2005 and according to the police record deceased had died at 1.30 p.m. but the post-mortem examination of the deceased was conducted on 23-7-2005. Learned counsel for the State is not in a position to explain the delay in post-mortem examination. Admittedly, during the investigation nothing was recovered from the petitioner, the investigation to his extent is complete and he is no more required for the said purpose and further incarceration of the petitioner would not serve any purpose. In this view of the matter, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rupees one lac with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judi.) of this Court. H.B.T./D-2/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.