1986 P Cr (PLP)
MAQSOOD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mazharul Haq, J |
| Parties | MAQSOOD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mazharul Haq, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (MAQSOOD ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Aslam Virk for Petitioner
- Date of hearing: 2nd November, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 304‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Rash and negligent driving, causing death‑‑Driver having no licence‑‑Prima facie, offence under section 304‑A, Penal Code proved‑‑Accused was, therefore, allowed bail. S.M. Hamid Ali for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2701‑B of 1985, decided on 12th November, 1985. ‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 304‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Rash and negligent driving, causing death‑‑Driver having no licence‑‑Prima facie, offence under section 304‑A, Penal Code proved‑‑Accused was, therefore, allowed bail. Muhammad Aslam Virk for Petitioner S.M. Hamid Ali for the State. Date of hearing: 2nd November, 1985. Petitioner is a wagon driver. He is accused of having caused the death of Hamid Ikram by rashly and negligently driving his vehicle. State counsel has contended that since the petitioner did not have licence for driving therefore, the offence would fall under section 304, P.P.C. Without prejudice to the case of either side I do not consider that the argument advanced on behalf of the State is correct. However, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner had a licence which has since been renewed. In view of the fact that prima facie it would be an offence under section 304‑A, P.P.C. the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 (ten thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C./Duty Magistrate, Lahore. S.A. Bail accepted.