1994 PLP 1793 (MLD)
FAKHAR BEHZAD and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1793 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | FAKHAR BEHZAD 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 1994 PLP 1793 (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 1994 PLP 1793 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 1793 (MLD) (FAKHAR BEHZAD and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324/34 & 337-F(v)
Police had submitted the challan against,the complainant party also in the case and, therefore, it was yet to be decided by Trial Court as to which of the parties had acted in aggression
Case against accused being of further inquiry fell under S.497(2), Cr.P.C.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioners seek bail in a case registered under section 324/34 and 337-F(v), P.P.C., vide F.I.R. No.309 dated 15-12-1992 at Police Station Sadar Sahiwal, for causing injuries to Aamer Ali Sarwar and Mirza Salim. The F.I.R. was registered on the complaint of Muhammad Rafiq. The incident took place at 11-15 a.m. F.I.R. was registered at 6-25 p.m. In the F.I.R. the complainant also stated that Fakhar Behzad petitioner No.1 on the basis of self-inflicted injuries has obtained a medical certificate.
2. During the investigation of the case the D.S.P. Crimes Branch, Lahore found that the complainant party was aggressor which finding was upheld by Inspector-General of Police, Punjab on the basis of which a counter-challan was submitted against the complainant party. Both the cases are being tried by the trial Court. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, petitioner No.1 also suffered seven injuries including fire-arm injury.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in view of a number of reported judgments of the Supreme Court the counter-case should not be taken into consideration. In the reported judgments relied upon by him then were on private complaint and in one of the cases there was only a counterversion. In the present case the police has submitted the challan against the complainant party also therefore it is yet to be decided by the trial Court as to which of the parties was aggressor.
4. It is a case of further inquiry and falls under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. The petitioners are allowed hail in the sum of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
5. Copy dasti on payment of usual charges. N.H.Q./F-150/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed.