PCRLJ 1995

1995 P Cr (PLP)

SHABBIR KHAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.1913‑B of 1994, decided on 11th May, 1994
Honorable Judges
Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1995 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J
Parties SHABBIR KHAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners 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 1995 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 1995 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sh. Muhammad Zubair, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (SHABBIR KHAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners 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

  • M. Hussain Chichar for Petitioner. Irshad Ahmad for the State.
  • Date of hearing: 11th May 1994.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/324/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑ Co‑accused who had been assigned the same role of having raised a Lalkara while armed with a Sota as assigned to the accused, had been released on bail by the Supreme Court as case against him was one of further inquiry‑‑‑Accused were admitted to bail in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

The petitioners, who along with others, are involved in a case under section 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. arising out of F.I.R. No. 130/92, dated 13‑12‑1992, registered at Police Station Kot Nainaf, seek to be admitted to bail.

2. As per F.I.R. the petitioners, are alleged to have raised Lalkara whereas their co‑accused Munir Khan fired at the complainant, which hit him on his right thigh.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks bail on the ground that Rafiq Khan, who has been assigned the same role, as has been assigned to the petitioners, has since 6een,released on bail by the august Supreme Court vide older dated 21st March, 1994, passed in Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.29‑L of 1994, so the petitioners are also entitled to the grant of bail on the principle of consistency in law, as the case against them is one of further inquiry.

4. The learned counsel for the State, on instructions from the Police Officer, has half‑heartedly opposed this application in view of the Supreme Court's order referred to above.

5. As the allegation against Rafiq Khan is that he along with the present petitioners raised Lalkara while armed with Sota and the case against him is one of further inquiry, so respectfully following the same observation of learned Judges of the august Supreme Court, the petitioners are admitted Lo At bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C., Narowal. MH.Q./S. 541/L Bail allowed,