1995 PLP 1537 (MLD)
Before Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1995 PLP 1537 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J |
| Parties | Before Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 1537 (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 1995 PLP 1537 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 1537 (MLD) (Before Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi Muhammad Salim for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 28th June, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV .of 1860), S.337‑A(ii)/337‑F(i)(ii)(iv)/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused was alleged to have given a hatchet blow on the head of the injured witness‑‑‑Case against accused did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C. ‑‑Investigating Officer after having found the accused innocent had recommended for his discharge from the case‑‑‑Case against accused was one of further inquiry and he was allowed bail in circumstances. Malik Noor Muhammad Sarfraz for the State.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioner, who is involved in a case under sections 337‑A(ii) and 337‑F(i)(ii)(iv)/148/149, P.P.C. arising out of F.I.R. No.348/93, dated 29‑11‑1993, registered at Police Station, Malakwal, seeks to be admitted to bail.
2. As per F.I.R., the petitioner was allegedly armed with a Kulhari and gave a blow with it on the head of Ranjha injured P:W.
3. Learned counsel contended that during the investigation the petitioner was found innocent as is apparent from Zimni No.12, dated 11‑1‑1994; hence in the presence of this material, the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry and he is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State, assisted by the police officer, has half heartedly opposed this bail application on the ground that the learned Additional Sessions Judge I, Mandi Bahauddin while dismissing the application of the petitioner did not agree with the opinion of the police.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Admittedly, the petitioner. is involved in a case which does not fall within the prohibitory clause. Over and above this, the Investigating Officer vide Zimni, referred above, opined that the petitioner has been involved in this case falsely and recommended for his discharge from the case. No doubt, the injury attributed to the petitioner is borne out by the medi‑colegal report, but in view of the abovementioned finding of the police, the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry, as it would be determined after the recording of some evidence which version is correct; hence the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Ps.50,000 (fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./G‑266/L Bail granted.