2002 PLP 1014 (MLD)
FAKHAR ABBAS ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1014 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Muhammad Sabir, J |
| Parties | FAKHAR ABBAS ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1014 (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 2002 PLP 1014 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Muhammad Sabir, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1014 (MLD) (FAKHAR ABBAS ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 18th October, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324/394/459/34‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused was not named in F.I.R., but was implicated on statement of co‑accused whose identity card was found at the place of occurrence‑‑‑Accused had not fired at the complainant‑‑ Worth of statement of co‑accused was to be evaluated during trial‑‑‑Case of accused being of further inquiry he was admitted to bail. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutta for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 18th October, 2001. Petitioner Fakhar Abbas seeks post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.69 of 2001 registered under sections 459/324/394/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Shahkot, District Sahiwal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant Tanveer Kausar was asleeping in her house alongwith his brother in corridor of the house and at 1‑30 a.m. (night) three persons wearing masks whose description has been given in the F.I.R. entered the house. They awakened the complainant and her brother Zahid Javed. The brother and sister were confined in a room. They obtained forcibly keys of the rooms from them 'but they raised hue and cry whereupon accused fired at the complainant, report of gun‑shot attracted the eye‑witnesses and the accused without taking anything from the house fled away. During investigation Yasin one of the co‑accused was arrested as his Identity Card was found in staircase of the complainant whereby he was traced out. On his arrest he disclosed that petitioner and Muhammad Tahir were his accomplice in the aforesaid occurrence .12 bore carbine was recovered from the petitioner during investigation. The fire is attributed to Yasin co‑accused. The challan has been submitted but the trial has not commenced so far.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was arrested on 22‑4‑2001, the trial has not commenced. There is no direct evidence to connect petitioner with the crime. The blow which caused injury to complainant is attributed to co‑accused Yasin. The case against the petitioner is of further inquiry.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the bail. Heard. Record perused.
6. Admittedly petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. He‑ was implicated on the statement of Yasin co‑accused whose Identity Card was found at the place of occurrence. Petitioner has not fired at the complainant. The worth of the statement of co‑accused Yasin is to be evaluated during the trial. At present the case of the petitioner falls within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. i.e. of further inquiry
7. For the reasons stated above 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 trial Court. H.B.T./F‑99/L Bail granted