1984 P Cr (PLP)
ALAM SHAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1984 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | ALAM SHAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 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 1984 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 P Cr (PLP) (ALAM SHAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A M. Sultan Alam for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 9th March, 1982.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497 read with Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302-Bail, grant of -- (Murder case) - Two out of three alleged eye-witnesses, including complainant not supporting prosecution case in their statements recorded under S. 164, Cr. P. C.--Matter, -held, one of further inquiry-Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances. Ch. Nazir Ahmad for the State.
Judgment & Decree
A M. Sultan Alam for Petitioner. Ch. Nazir Ahmad for the State. Date of hearing: 9th March, 1982. Petitioners, Alam Shah and Willayat Shah have moved this petition for bail in a case under section 302/324/452/34, P. P. C., registered at P. S. Kabirwala, vide F. I. R. No. 98. dated 27th April, 1981. The prosecution case is that the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention caused the death of Muhammad Ramzan on 25th April, 1981 in the area of Chak No. 18/A. H. of P. S. Kabirwala. As for the petitioners, it is alleged that Alam Shah while armed with a knife and Walayat Shah with spear caused injuries to Muhammad Ramzan, who subsequently succumbed to the same.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complainant and Ahmad Bakhsh, eye-witnesses, in their statements recorded under section 164 have exonerated the petitioners. Before me, Muhammad Yousaf and Ahmad Bakhsh have owned their statement under section 164, Cr. P. C. As against this, learned counsel for the State has opposed this application.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that out of three alleged eye-witnesses two eye-witnesses including the com plainant, who is first cousin of the deceased, and Ahmed Bakhsh P. W. have not supported the prosecution case in their statements recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. (certified copies placed on the record) and, as such, A the mater requires further inquiry. The petitioners are, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A. C., Kabirwalas S. G. D. Bail granted.