2001 PLP 352 (YLR)
SAKINA BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2001 PLP 352 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Sharif J |
| Parties | SAKINA BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 352 (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 2001 PLP 352 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 352 (YLR) (SAKINA BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Pervaiz Aslam Chaudhry for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497(1)‑‑‑Penal Code (ILV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 337‑B & 148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused being a woman, her case was covered by the first proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C. entitling her for concession of bail. Sh. Afzaal Hussain for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 497(1)‑‑‑Penal Code (ILV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 337‑B & 148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused being a woman, her case was covered by the first proviso to S.497(1), Cr.P.C. entitling her for concession of bail. Pervaiz Aslam Chaudhry for Petitioner. Sh. Afzaal Hussain for the State. Petitioner alongwith four others was named in case F.I.R. No.123 of 1998 registered on the statement of Balqees Bibi wife of Gulzar Masih. Five persons were named in the F.I.R. namely Yousuf Masih, Nadeem Masih, Saleem Masih. Mst. Sakina, who is wife of Yousuf Masih and Mst. Nasreen. As far as, present petitioner is concerned, she while armed with "Danda" caused injury on the person of the complainant which hit on the back of her left leg.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no injury qua the deceased is attributed to the petitioner, that she is a woman and her case is covered by the first proviso of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State very candidly submits that petitioner is a woman and she is entitled for the grant of bail.
4. After hearing the parties, as the petitioner is a woman and her case is covered by the first proviso of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. this petition is accepted. Petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.30,000 (thirty thousand) with one surety in the like‑amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./S‑262/L Bail granted.