1987 P Cr (PLP)
GULAB KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Nisar, J |
| Parties | GULAB KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 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 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 P Cr (PLP) (GULAB KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Nazar Farid Khokhar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑All eye witnesses deposing to be not present at spot at relevant time in their statements under S. 164, Cr.P.C.‑‑Case held to be of further inquiry‑‑ Bail granted in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Hussain Chadhhar for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑All eye witnesses deposing to be not present at spot at relevant time in their statements under S. 164, Cr.P.C.‑‑Case held to be of further inquiry‑‑ Bail granted in circumstances. Malik Nazar Farid Khokhar for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Hussain Chadhhar for the Complainant. The petitioner stands charged with the murder of Naimat Ali deceased with rifle shot on 18‑6‑1986. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Shafi, Hakim Ali and Asghar Ali.
2. Bail is claimed on the ground that all the three eye‑witnesses have got their statements recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. to the effect that they were not present at the spot at the relevant time. Learned counsel for the complainant confirms this position.
3. In this view of the matter, it is case of further inquiry. Accordingly I grant the petition and. admit the petitioner on bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C., Okara. S.A./G‑24/L Bail allowed.