1996 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1996 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 1996 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Rana Muhammad Arif for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Except the allegation of the complainant about the taking away of his son by the accused to their house, no evidence of torture metted out to the deceased at the hands of accused was available
Accused had been reported innocent by the Police-- Attending circumstances near the dead body could lead to the inference that the deceased had committed suicide
Case against accused to circumstances required further inquiry and they were allowed bail accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Except the allegation of the complainant about the taking away of his son by the accused to their house, no evidence of torture metted out to the deceased at the hands of accused was available
Accused had been reported innocent by the Police-- Attending circumstances near the dead body could lead to the inference that the deceased had committed suicide
Case against accused to circumstances required further inquiry and they were allowed bail accordingly. Rana Muhammad Arif for Petitioners. J.V. Gardner for the State. Muhammad Shafique and Muhammad Jahangir alias Pappu, accused/petitioners, have applied for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.227, dated 8-11-1995, offence under section 302/34, P.P.C., Police Station Shalimar, Lahore. F.I.R. was lodged by Muhammad Sharif, who stated in the F.I.R, that on 7-11-1995, at 12 noon, he alongwith other family members were present in the street. Muhammad Jamil, Muhammad Shafique and Muhammad Jahangir were taking with them Muhammad Asghar, his son. On the' asking of the complainant, the accused told him that Muhammad Asghar had committed theft and they wanted the recovery of the stolen property from him. Despite the requests of the complainant, Muhammad Asghar, his son was taken to the house of the accused. He was confined in a room throughout the night He was subjected to torture. The complainant went in the morning to the house of the accused and saw the dead body of his son lying on a chair. A rope was tied around his neck and the other end of the rope was tied with exhaust-fan. After post-mortem examination the doctor reported a legature mark measuring 33 x 2 c.m. all around the neck at the level of thyroid cartilage. The subcutaneous tissue under the site of legature was parchment like. Muscles of the neck showed bruises. Right cornu of Hyoid bone was fractured with bruising. There were two other linear bruises on the back of left shoulder and the back of right shoulder. The cause of death was reported as interference at the level of neck by legature under injury No. l leading to asphyxia and death.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, submitted that except the allegation of the complainant that the three accused were seen taking his son to their house there was no evidence to torture metted out to the deceased at the hands of the accused. The petitioners were reported innocent by the police. The attending circumstances near the dead body, could lead to the inference that the deceased committed suicide.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the circumstances and the evidence available, the petitioners' case requires further enquiry with regard to the commission of offence by the 1 accused/petitioners. The petitioners are allowed bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Lahore (Cantt.). N.H.Q./M-76/L Bail allowed.