1989 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. RAJ BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus PAYAO SHAH and another‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Ishaq Khan, J |
| Parties | Mst. RAJ BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus PAYAO SHAH and another‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
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 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Muhammad Ishaq Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. RAJ BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus PAYAO SHAH and another‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- H. Sadullah Khan for Petitioner.
- Zafar Abbas Zaidi for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.2‑‑Bail‑‑Record showed that accused had also been fired at by deceased and a cross‑report was lodged against deceased to that effect‑‑Neuro‑Surgeon who had examined accused declared age of accused as 13 years at the time of his examination‑‑Such aspects made case of accused arguable for grant of bail‑‑Interference in grant of bail declined. Malik Hamed Gul Khaa for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.2‑‑Bail‑‑Record showed that accused had also been fired at by deceased and a cross‑report was lodged against deceased to that effect‑‑Neuro‑Surgeon who had examined accused declared age of accused as 13 years at the time of his examination‑‑Such aspects made case of accused arguable for grant of bail‑‑Interference in grant of bail declined. H. Sadullah Khan for Petitioner. Zafar Abbas Zaidi for Respondents. Malik Hamed Gul Khaa for the State. Mst. Rai Bibi has sought the cancellation of bail granted to Payao Shah accused‑respondent by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lakki by his order, dated 2‑5‑1988 in a case under section 302, P.P.C. registered vide F.I.R. No.35 dated 31‑3‑1988 of Police Station Ghazni Khel.
2. Arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Advocate‑General on behalf of the State have been heard and record of the case has been examined.
3. From the perusal of the record it is clear that the accused‑respondent had also been fired at and to this effect a cross‑report No.36 was lodged m which Sher Dad deceased in this case has been charged for firing at the complainant. The medical evidence of Sher Dad deceased would reveal that heart, right lung, pleura and peritonium had been injured while the 6th and 7th ribs on the right side had been fractured. After receipt of such damaging injuries it is to be determined at the trial whether the deceased could after receipt of those injuries fire at the accused‑respondent. Besides the Neuro‑Surgeon who had examined the accused‑respondent had opined his age to be 13 years at the time of examination, he was thus at the time of occurrence under age as well. Both these aspects of the case make the case of the accused‑respondent arguable for the purposes of bail and, therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the discretion exercised by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Accordingly this bail cancellation application is rejected. H.B.T./742/P Application rejected.