1986 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUL MALIK and others Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Nisar, J |
| Parties | ABDUL MALIK and others Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 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 1986 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: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUL MALIK and others Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Bashir Khan for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 426‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Petitioners; attributed simple injuries to prosecution witnesses only‑‑Petitioner allowed bail in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 1984, decided on 13th January, 1985 ‑‑‑S. 426‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Petitioners; attributed simple injuries to prosecution witnesses only‑‑Petitioner allowed bail in circumstances. Muhammad Bashir Khan for Petitioners. This is, an application for the suspension of sentences of Abdul Malik and Ashiq Hussain petitioners dated 28‑3‑1984. They alongwith Fida Hussain were, tried for the murder of Noor Ahmad and for causing injuries to Fatal Ahmad and Allah Diwaya P.Ws. as also for committing trespass into the house of the deceased,
2. Fida Hussain to whom injuries to the deceased are attributed has not applied for the suspension of sentence. However. Abdul Malik and Ashiq Hussain, who are attributed simple injuries to Fazal Ahmad and Allah Diwaya P.Ws. have applied for suspension of their sentence. Fida Hussain had admitted the occurrence and examined defence evidence.
3. In the above circumstances, I am persuaded to suspend operation of their sentence on their furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Multan. S. G. D. Sentence suspended.