1989 PLP 2953 (MLD)
ARSHAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent.
| Citation | 1989 PLP 2953 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Riaz Ahmed J |
| Parties | ARSHAD HUSSAIN — 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 2953 (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 2953 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Riaz Ahmed J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 2953 (MLD) (ARSHAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Aslam Bajwa for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 460/34--Bail, grant of--Case of un-witnessed occurrence--Exculpatory extra--Judicial confession made by accused--No other evidence collected against accused during investigation--Case of further inquiry--Bail allowed in circumstances. Munir Ahmed for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 460/34--Bail, grant of--Case of un-witnessed occurrence--Exculpatory extra--Judicial confession made by accused--No other evidence collected against accused during investigation--Case of further inquiry--Bail allowed in circumstances. Muhammad Aslam Bajwa for Petitioner. Munir Ahmed for the State. Mst. Aysha and her daughter Mst. Sughra were murdered. It was an unwitnessed crime and after about one day, the residents of the Mohallah became suspicious and then they discovered that the murder had been committed. Since it was an unwitnessed crime, therefore, nobody could be arrested. But during the investigation, before Shah Muhammad, Lumbardar and Muhammad Ramzan, petitioner Arshad made an extra-judicial confession, in which, he named Muhammad Inayat, Muhammad Saeed and Sabir Hussain, as the responsible for the commission of crime, who during the course of committing Haraba, had murdered both the women. 2. The perusal of extra-judicial confession made by the petitioner Arshad j Hussain, shows that it is exculpatory. He had joined Muhammad Inayat, Sabir I Hussain and Muhammad Saeed and had come back from the scene of occurrence A on account of fear. The extra-judicial confession made by Arshad Hussain petitioner also shows that after the occurrence, all the accused had come to his Baithak where the looted money was distributed and Arshad Hussain, petitioner, was forcibly given Rs.500. The extra-judicial confession was made or. 17th of January, 1989 but the petitioner was arrested on 17th of February, 1978. 3. During the course of investigation, no other evidence was collected against the petitioner. Arshad Hussain to connect him with the commission of crime. Obviously, this is a case of further enquiry and falls within the purview of section 497 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes security in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Addl: Sessions Judge seized of the trial. SA./A-668/L Bail allowed.