2009 PLP 2299 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ARIF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2009 PLP 2299 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | S. Ali Hassan Rizvi, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ARIF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 2299 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 2299 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: S. Ali Hassan Rizvi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 2299 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ARIF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337-F(iv)
Accused had throughout claimed that the injury was inflicted by some other manner, however, it was on non-vital part of the body
Injured despite notices issued by the Medical Board, had failed to appear for re-examination
Accused was behind the bars for last three months, while the challan was submitted, but no progress had been made in the trial
Accused if kept in jail till finality of trial same would amount to punishment without trial
Offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr. P. C.
Attending circumstance had made case of accused that of further inquiry
Accused, was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Ch. Zulfiqar Ali Sidhu, Addl. I'.-G. assisted by Mumtaz Hassan Awan with Haq Nawaz, S.I.
Judgment & Decree
S. ALI HASSAN RIZVI, J.
The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.286, registered with Police Station Gaggo, Distract Vehari on 3-6-2008 for offences under sections 337-F (iv)/34, P.P.C., mainly on the ground that the injured Mukhtar Ahmad despite summoning by the Medical Board constituted to re-examine the injury has failed to appear with mala fide because the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case whereas his co-accused Shahid has already been enlarged on bail; that the role of the petitioner mentioned in the F.I.R. was that of causing hatchet blow on the right hand of the victim which is on non-vital part of the body; that the offence does not fall' within the prohibitory clause; that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last three months while the challan has been submitted before the trial Court and no purpose would be served to the prosecution to keep the petitioner in jail.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed all the grounds by arguing that the offence in which the petitioner charged is punishable up to five years; that recovery has been effected; that the trial is in progress and that the petitioner has been held guilty, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
3. Heard. Since the injured Mukhtar Ahmad despite notices issued by the Medical Board has failed to appear for re-examination; the petitioner throughout claimed that the injury inflicted is caused by some other manner, however, it is on the non-vital part of the body. The petitioner is behind the bars for three months while the challan is submitted. Statedly, no progress rather trial has as yet not commenced, the petitioner till finally of trial if kept in jail would amount to punishment without trial. The offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The attending circumstances as put forth makes it a case of further inquiry, therefore, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-421/L Bail grant.