1989 PLP 717 (MLD)
ASHIQ HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 717 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rashid Aziz Khan, I |
| Parties | ASHIQ HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 717 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 717 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan, I.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 717 (MLD) (ASHIQ HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Hussain Awan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Report of Medical Specialist indicating accused to be old and infirm and suffering from heart ailment‑‑Accused requiring specialised treatment not available in jail hospital‑‑Bail allowed in circumstances. A.R. Arshad for the Complainant. Syed Ali Raza for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4366/B of 1988, decided on 15th February, 1989. ‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302 & 148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Report of Medical Specialist indicating accused to be old and infirm and suffering from heart ailment‑‑Accused requiring specialised treatment not available in jail hospital‑‑Bail allowed in circumstances. Malik Muhammad Hussain Awan for Petitioner. A.R. Arshad for the Complainant. Syed Ali Raza for the State. Petitioner Ashiq Hussain Shah seeks bail in a case registered against him under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. with Police Station Lala Musa, vide F.I.R. dated 9‑8‑1988. The main ground on which the bail is being sought is old age and infirmity. In pursuance of this Court's order the petitioner was examined by a Board consisting of Heart Specialists who have‑given their opinion that the age of the petitioner is between 60/65 years. There is no vision in the right eye and the left .eye is having poor vision. As far as the condition of his heart is concerned, the opinion is that the patient is having Ischaemic Heart disease (Old Myocardial Infarction and Angina pectosis)'. A perusal of the report of the Specialist clearly indicates that the petitioner is old and infirm. He is suffering from heart ailment. In these circumstances I hold that it would not be possible to treat‑the petitioner in jail as it requires specialised treatment. Therefore, I allow bail to the petitioner provided he furnishes security in the sum of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, concerned. SA./A‑549/L Bail allowed.