2013 PLP 734 (YLR)
ZAHOOR KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2013 PLP 734 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Qasim Khan, J |
| Parties | ZAHOOR KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 PLP 734 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2013 PLP 734 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Qasim Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2013 PLP 734 (YLR) (ZAHOOR KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Aziz Khan Niazi for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/148/149
Qatl-e-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons
Accused and co-accused had been nominated in the F.I.R., but no overt act had been attributed to them and they were shown to be merely present at the place of occurrence
Complainant's version had not been found to be wholly truthful during the course of investigation and report under S.173, Cr.P.C. had been submitted against a different set of accused
Applicability of Ss. 148 and 149 of P.P.C. to the extent of the accused and co-accused required further inquiry
Report under S. 173, Cr.P.C. had been sent to court, but there was no substantial progress in the trial
Accused and co-accused were admitted to bail accordingly. Rana Ibrar Hussain for the Complainant. Ch. Muhammad Akbar, Deputy Prosecutor General with Mukhtiar Ahmad A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN, J.
Petitioners seek post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.46 of 2011 dated 5-2-2011 under sections 302, 148, 149 P.P.C. registered at Police Station Yousafwala, District Sahiwal, wherein, the precise allegation against the petitioners is that at the time of mounting of assault of their co-accused, the petitioners remained present at the place of occurrence.
2. It is argued by learned counsel that petitioners have been falsely involved in this case as a result of widened net. Further argued that although the petitioners have been nominated in the F.I.R. but no overt act is attributed to them, as no injury was caused by the petitioners to anyone. It is further argued that the version of the complainant has been found incorrect during the course of investigation and report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has been submitted against a different set of accused. The learned counsel has next contended that petitioners are behind the bars and after investigation report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has been submitted, but there is no substantial progress in the trial.
3. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail on the ground that petitioners are nominated in the F.I.R., as such, no case for bail is made out at this stage.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. A bare perusal of the F.I.R. would show that although both the petitioners have been nominated in the F.I.R., but no overt act has been attributed to them and they have been shown to be merely present at the place of occurrence. It has also come on the record that version of the complainant has not been found wholly truth during the course of investigation and report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has been submitted against a different set of accused. In these circumstances, applicability of offence under section 148/149, P.P.C. to the extent of the petitioners requires further inquiry. Additionally, the petitioners are behind the bars, report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has been sent to court, but there is no substantial progress in the trial. The petitioners cannot be kept confined for an indefinite period as a measure of advance punishment. Consequently, this petition is accepted and petitioners are admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Judge. MWA/Z-5/L Bail granted.