1989 PLP 4963 (MLD)
IJAZ ALI SHEIKH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 4963 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rashid Aziz Khan, J |
| Parties | IJAZ ALI SHEIKH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4963 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 4963 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4963 (MLD) (IJAZ ALI SHEIKH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Ghulam Sarwar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑S.497‑‑Probibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3 & 4‑ Bail, grant of‑‑Hundred grams of heroin was recovered from accused on a thoroughfare from his personal search‑‑Provision of Section 103 Cr. P.C., was not attracted and association of public witness was thus not necessary‑‑Bail refused in circumstances. Sami Ullah Khan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S.497‑‑Probibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3 & 4‑ Bail, grant of‑‑Hundred grams of heroin was recovered from accused on a thoroughfare from his personal search‑‑Provision of Section 103 Cr. P.C., was not attracted and association of public witness was thus not necessary‑‑Bail refused in circumstances. Ch. Ghulam Sarwar for Petitioner. Sami Ullah Khan for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered against him for an offence under section 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hudd) Order, 1979, with Police Station Nawankot, Lahore. The allegation against the petitioner is that he on 23‑5‑1989, was found in possession of 100 grams of heroin, therefore, was apprehended at the spot by the first informant, Akmal Hussain, Excise Inspector as well as the police. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that since 23‑5‑1989 the petitioner is behind the bar and is not required by the police any more. Contends that the recovery was effected from a thickly populated area yet no witness from the public was associated. Submits that the present case has been. got registered against the petitioner with ulterior motive by the police. Contenticns have been opposed by learned counsel for the State. I have heard learned counsel and perused the file. The petitioner was apprehended from a thoroughfare and on personal search 100 grams of heroin was recovered. No mala fides on the part of the police is alleged in the petition. Since the petitioner was arrested from a thoroughfare and from his personal search 100 grams of heroin was recovered, therefore, I feel the association of a public witness was not essential as ingredients of section 103 Cr.P.C., would not be attracted to such a place. In these circumstances, I think it will suffice if a direction is given to the learned trial Court to conclude the trial expeditiously. With this observation the petition is dismissed. S.A./I‑151/L Bail refused.