1999 PLP 3175 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1999 PLP 3175 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 3175 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 3175 (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: 1999 PLP 3175 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed Sardar Shah Bokhari for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497 (2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 324/337-A(i)/337(i)
Complainant had suffered simple injuries only
Maximum punishment only was not to be taken into consideration while deciding bail matters
Perusal of entire circumstances of the case had revealed that the accused was likely to be tried and made answerable for the simple injuries caused by him to the complainant
Alleged incident of firing at the complainant admittedly had taken place pursuant to exchange of abuses between him and the accused
Law could not be stretched in favour of prosecution and any doubt arising even at bail stage was to be resolved in favour of accused
Accused was neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and he was no longer required by the police-- Case against accused called for further inquiry and he was admitted to bail accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Sh. Muhammad Rahim for the State. Syed Murtaza Ali Zaidi for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 16th April, 1998. The present petition contends for bail for the petitioner in the case registered vide F. I. R. No. 363 of 1997 dated 29-10-1997 under section 324/ 337-A (i)/337-(i) P. P. C. at Police Station Katcha Khooh, District Khanewal.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the complainant were heard at length in respect of the contentions stated herein. The learned counsel for the State and the complainant opposed the present bail petition and pointed out that the petitioner, single accused, had fired with his gun, duly recovered, and caused injuries to the complainant Muhammad Akram. Further submitted that the instant case is hit by the prohibitory clause, as the punishment for the same is 10 years R.I.
3. However, admittedly, as borne out from the record, the injured/complainant had only suffered simple injuries. Furthermore, it is an established principle of law in bail matters that while deciding the cases under the said provisions, only the maximum sentence shall not be taken into consideration, and that, therefore, taking the entire circumstances of the case into consideration, the petitioner is likely to be tried and made answerable for the simple injuries caused by him to the complainant, and that, admittedly, as borne out by the perusal of the F. I. R., the alleged incident of firing at the complainant had taken place pursuant to exchange of abuses between him and the present petitioner. In addition thereto, it has been taken notice of that the Honourable Supreme Court has repeatedly held, specially in PLD 1972 SC 81 and PLD 1972 SC 277, that any doubt arising even at the bail stage should be resolved in favour of the accused and that the law should not be stretched in favour of the prosecution. It has been further confirmed on behalf of the State that the petitioner is neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and that he is no longer required by the police. Therefore, under the facts and circumstances highlighted, it is hereby held that the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry.
4. Consequently, the petitioner is hereby allowed bail in the sum of 113 Rs. 30,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q./M-1017/L Bail allowed.