2005 PLP 482 (MLD)
ALHAMAD ABBAS alias HAMDI SHAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 482 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, J |
| Parties | ALHAMAD ABBAS alias HAMDI SHAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 482 (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 2005 PLP 482 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 482 (MLD) (ALHAMAD ABBAS alias HAMDI SHAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Badar Munir Chaudhry for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 7th July, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Further inquiry‑‑‑Allegation against accused was that he caused fist blows and kicks to the deceased resulting into his death, but according to opinion of Doctor, deceased was suffering from "Anti HCV Positive" and he died natural death due to said disease ‑‑‑Co‑accused of accused who were his father and brother were found innocent during investigation‑‑‑No enmity existed between the parties and occurrence was a sudden flare‑up‑‑‑Was yet to be seen if accused ultimately could be held liable for murder of deceased‑‑‑Case of accused, in circumstances called for further inquiry into his guilt and was covered by subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.‑‑‑Accused was stated to be a young boy and previous non‑convict‑‑‑Accused, in circumstances was entitled to concession of bail‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Miss Samina Shahzadi for the State.
Judgment & Decree
3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been roped in; that it was a sudden flare‑up and no premeditation in the same; that the deceased was suffering from Anti HCV Positive and so he had met with a natural death as opined by the doctor; that it has also been formed during the investigation that there existed no enmity between him and the deceased and his father Iftikhar Hussain Shah and uncle Intesar Hussain Shah were innocent; that in these circumstances, he has been left to the mercy of the Court; and that he is a young boy and not a previous convict.
4. On the other hand the learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition on the ground that he is named in the F.I.R. that he has given fist blows and kicks to the deceased resulting into his death.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made from both the parties with the help of available record.
6. He allegedly had caused fist blows and kicks to the deceased resulting into his death.
7. According to the opinion dated 28‑2‑2004 of the Medical Officer, Tehsil Headquarter Hospital, Jaranwala, the deceased was suffering from Anti HCV Positive and he had died of the same. He has clearly opined that his death was natural.
8. The police record also shows that his aforesaid father and uncle have been found innocent during the investigation. It was also found during the same that there existed no enmity between the parties and the occurrence was a sudden flare‑up. He, however, was left to the mercy of the Court.
9. Anyway, due to the apparent non‑support of the medical evidence to allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. and the above opinion of the police in the investigation and leaving him to the mercy of the Court, it is yet to be seen that if he ultimately can be held liable for the murder of the deceased.
10. His case, therefore, calls for further inquiry into his guilt. The same, therefore is covered under subsection (2) of section
497. Cr.P.C.
11. Though he has been arrested about three months back but it is needless to mention here that when case of an accused may be found fit for bail, then such relief is to be extended as a matter of right and not grace and he cannot be detained for a moment even unnecessarily.
12. He is stated to be a young boy and previous non‑convict which has not been controverted by the State's side.
13. In these circumstances, I find him entitled to bail, The Petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
14. It is here made clear that any observation made above shall not influence mind of the learned Trial Court in any manner. H.B.T./A-258/L Bail granted.