2004 PLP 206 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑ — Respondent
| Citation | 2004 PLP 206 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑ — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 206 (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 2004 PLP 206 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 206 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑ — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Muhammad Asif Saeed for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 6th May, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337‑F(iii)/337‑L (2)/ 337‑D/34‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Further inquiry‑‑‑Medico‑legal Report showed that the accused had received five injuries and out of said injuries four were caused with sharp‑edged weapon and mostly on the vital parts of body of the accused‑‑‑One injury was kept under observation while other injuries were declared to be within the purview of S.337‑F(iii), P.P.C.‑‑‑Said injuries had not been explained by the complainant and other witnesses in their statements before the police‑‑ Suppression of injuries on the part of the complainant prima facie had shown that he had suppressed the. true facts‑‑‑Case of accused, in circumstances, fell within the purview of further inquiry and was covered by subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.‑‑‑Accused was admitted to hail, in circumstances. Sayed Zia Haider for the Complainant Sayed Tanveer Haider Buzdar for the State
Judgment & Decree
Sayed Zia Haider for the Complainant Sayed Tanveer Haider Buzdar for the State Date of hearing: 6th May, 2003. Through this application under section 497 Cr.P.C. petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.23 of 2003, dated 19‑1‑2003 registered under sections 337‑F (iii)/337‑L (2) 337‑D/34 P.P.C. at Police Station City Khanewal on the statement of Abdul Waheed.
2. The brief allegation in the F. I. R. is that some dispute had arisen between the, parties for the sale of milk by the complainant to the daughter of the petitioner. After sometime Muhammad Iqbal petitioner and Nadeem while armed with daggers came into the house of the complainant and opened the door by force. Muhammad Iqbal gave a dagger blow in the abdomen of Abdul Lateef while his co‑accused Naeem also gave dagger blow on the abdomen and other parts of Habib.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner and his brother also received injuries from the hands of the complainant party which were suppressed by the complainant and P.Ws. in their statements under sections 154 and 161 Cr.P.C. It is further contended that petitioner received five injuries out of which four injuries are on the head caused with sharp‑edged weapon attracting provisions of section 337‑F (iii) P.P.C. It is also contended that prosecution case is false and petitioner has succeeded in making out a case of further inquiry.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant opposes this application on the ground that the injuries on the person of Muhammad Rafiq were serious in nature and he was operated. It is further contended that the accused party has taken a false stand and the concurrence had taken place in the house of complainant upon. It is also contended that the cross‑version of the petitioner has been found false.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State also opposes this application.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for all the parties and also perused the record. According to the medico‑legal report of Muhammad Iqbal petitioner, he received five injuries, out of which four injuries were caused with sharp‑edged weapon and mostly are on the vital parts of the petitioner. Injury No.5 was kept under observation while‑Injury No.4 was declared as falling within the purview of section' 337‑F (iii) P.P.C. These injuries have not been explained by the complainant and other witnesses in their statements before the police. The suppression of injuries on the part of the complainant prima facie shows that he has suppressed the true facts. Hence, the case of the petitioner falls within the purview of further inquiry and is covered by subsection (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. He shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bond amounting to Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Illaqa Magistrate. H.B.T./M-2227/L Bail granted.