1989 PLP 2697 (MLD)
FAIZ RASUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 2697 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J |
| Parties | FAIZ RASUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 2697 (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 1989 PLP 2697 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 2697 (MLD) (FAIZ RASUL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Afzal Khan Niazi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 21st March, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/317--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 19--Bail, grant of--Only evidence collected by investigating agency against accused was extra-judicial confession made by co-accused before prosecution witnesses, while accused was not alleged to have made any such confession before them--Both prosecution witnesses had sworn affidavits exonerating accused--Case of accused requiring further inquiry- Accused admitted to bail. Abdul Samad Hashmi for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Afzal Khan Niazi for Petitioner. Abdul Samad Hashmi for the State. Date of hearing: 21st March, 1989. This is a petition for bail on behalf of Faiz Rasul petitioner, accused in a case registered under section 302, P.P.C. and sections 10 and 11 of Ordinance VII of 1979.
2. The case was registered on 5-10-1988 on the report of Yar Muhammad wherein he stated that at 7-30 a.m. he proceeded towards the railway line when he saw the dead body of newly born female child lying on the thoroughfare. Initially, the case was registered under section 317, P.P.C.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends and the learned counsel for the State concedes that the only evidence collected by the investigating agency against the petitioner is the extra-judicial confession made by co-accused Mst. Naseem Akhtar before Khalid Masud and Ghulam Muhammad. The order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge shows that both the aforesaid P.Ws. had sworn affidavits exonerating the petitioner. The petitioner is not alleged to have made any extra-judicial confession before them. In the circumstances, I feel inclined to the view that the case of the petitioner needs further-inquiry. I, therefore, admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 two' sureties in like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Mianwali. H.B.T./F-121/L Bail granted.