MLD 2006

2006 PLP 1040 (MLD)

FALAK SHER — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2006-March-9
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 1040 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties FALAK SHER — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1040 (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 2006 PLP 1040 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1040 (MLD) (FALAK SHER — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Naseer ud Din Khan Nayyar for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302

Bail, refusal of

Accused was found guilty in the case and. was placed in Column No.3 of the challan

Accused had caused injury on the abdomen of deceased

F.I.R. and statement made by injured prosecution witness under S.161, Cr.P.C., showed that accused was implicated in the case

Offence against accused fell within the prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.

No ground having been made out for hail, bail petition of accused, was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; that in fact according to finding of the police he was present in the "Mela" which was being held in the village; that there is substantial evidence in favour of the petitioner; that in fact murder was committed by Matloob Hussain who was arrested by the police; that no recovery was effected from him and that case of petitioner is of further inquiry falling under subsection 2 of section 497, Cr.P.C. On the other hand, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.; that he had caused injury on the abdomen of the deceased; that there are injuries on the person of injured P.Ws. who had supported the case of prosecution; that he had been placed in Column No.3 of the challan and that offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Heard, I have gone through the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. with the assistance of learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was found guilty in this case. He had been placed in Column No.3 of the challan. He had caused injury on the abdomen of the deceased. According to F.I.R. and specially statement made by Arif injured P.W. under section 161 he had implicated the petitioner in this case. Offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. In this view of the matter no ground for bail is made out. This petition is dismissed. H.B.T./F-15/L Bail refused.