2006 PLP 558 (SCMR)
AAMER SHAHZAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASIM and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 558 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Rana Bhagwandas and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | AAMER SHAHZAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASIM and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 558 (SCMR)?
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 558 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Rana Bhagwandas and Hamid Ali Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 558 (SCMR) (AAMER SHAHZAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASIM and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- N.A. Butt, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Hasnaat Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.1.
- Date of hearing: 5th July, 2005.
- Dil Muhammad Tarar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 14-3-2005 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1552-B of 2005 by Lahore High Court, Lahore).
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337-A(ii)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Cancellation of bail, refusal of
High Court in granting bail to accused was stated to have been misled in observing that the injury attributed to accused by means of hatchet on the person of the complainant was not reflected in the F.I.R. and the Medico-legal report
Perusal of record including the Medico-legal certificates showed that it was a bona fide slip of pen or a clerical error, which did not invalidate the essence of the impugned order of High Court
Investigation in the case had been completed and the accused was behind the bars awaiting his trial along with his co-accused
Discretion exercised by High Court in granting bail to accused did not suffer from any error of law or jurisdiction
Leave to appeal was refused to complainant in circumstances and the petition was dismissed accordingly. Dil Muhammad Tarar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the Lahore High Court order, dated 4-3-2005 admitting respondent Muhammad Asim in a case under section 337-A(ii), P.P.C.
2. Precise allegations against the respondent appear to be that he dealt a hatchet blow on the person of injured Muhammad Zafar on frontal region of head which on examination was found to be 4.5 x 1 c.m. After X-ray of skull the injury was certified to be "Shajjah-i-Mudiha", falling under section 337-A(ii), P.P.C. Maximum punishment for this offence provided under the law does not exceed 5 years.
3. Learned counsel attempted to argue that learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court was misled in observing that injury attributed to the respondent by means of hatchet on the person of Aamer Shahzad was not reflected in the Medico-legal report and the F.I.R. Be that as it may, on perusal of record including medico-legal certificates, we find that it was a bona fide slip of pen or a clerical error, which does not invalidate the essence of the order of the High Court.
4. Since the investigation had been completed and the respondent was behind the bars, awaiting his trial along with co-accused persons, discretion exercised by the High Court, in our considered opinion, does not suffer from any error of law or jurisdiction.
5. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case we do not find any legal infirmity or arbitrariness in the impugned order, which does not warrant any interference. Petition is, therefore, dismissed and leave refused. N.H.Q./A-9/SC?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave refused.