1987 PLP 1026 (MLD)
Mst. SAMEENA NAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 1026 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | Mst. SAMEENA NAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 1026 (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 1987 PLP 1026 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 1026 (MLD) (Mst. SAMEENA NAZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Azeem for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 9th July, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 307/199--Bail--Accused a woman- Stated to be not present at time of occurrence--Case covered under 5.497, second proviso Cr.P.C.--Bail granted. Faiz-ur-Rehman for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Muhammad Azeem for Petitioner. Faiz-ur-Rehman for the State. Date of hearing: 9th July, 1984. This is an application for bail on behalf of Mst. Sameena Naz petitioner in a case under section 307/109, P.P.C., registered at P.S. Badami Bagh, Lahore vide F.I.R. No. 221/84, dated 14-6-1984.
2. The prosecution case is that tl-e petitioner abetted Nazir Ahmad co-accused who launched murderous assault on Shaukat Ali, the father of the complainant and fired shots at him.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not present at the time of occurrence and as such her case is distinguishable. Learned counsel for the State however, opposed the plea for bail of the petitioner, "
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I find that the petitioner was not present at the time of occurrence and that she being a woman, her case falls within the second proviso to section A 497, Cr.P.C. To. my mind, it is a fit case for grant of bail. She shall be released on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A tC. /Duty Magistrate, Lahore. M.Y.H. Bail allowed.