2020 P Cr (PLP)
ZIA ULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ZIA ULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 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 2020 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 2020 P Cr (PLP) (ZIA ULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Mateeullah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 353, 440, 186 & 149
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7
Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13
Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt, obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions, act of terrorism
Joint role of firing attributed to several accused
Non-availability of Ballistic Expert report
Effect
Accused persons, along with 8 nominated and 3/4 unknown persons, were alleged to have launched murderous assault upon the police raiding party
Accused persons were nominated in the crime report but they were assigned the joint role of firing at police raiding party whereas, their co-accused was specifically alleged to have caused fire arm injury to the police constable
Several crime empties of different bore were recovered from the place of occurrence but none of the empties were designated to be the empties of official weapons, which should have been secured especially when as alleged the police had responded and had made cross-firing for fifteen minutes
Trained police officials while armed with respective weapons had conducted raid but surprisingly, they could not arrest any of the accused nominated in the crime report except one who had received fire arm injury at the spot
Accused persons were arrested later on and during investigation, recovery of fire arm weapons was shown against them but its connection with the alleged offence had to be determined by the Trial Court after recording the evidence especially when no report of Ballistic Expert was available on record
Accused persons were behind bars since arrest and their physical custody was not required to the police for further investigation
Case of petitioners was one of further inquiry into their guilt under section subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Petition for grant of bail was allowed and the accused persons were admitted to post-arrest bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. petitioners Zia Ullah and Parvaiz have sought post arrest bail in case FIR No.31 dated 06.02.2019, in respect of offences under sections 324, 353, 440, 186, 148 and 149, P.P.C., section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and section 13 (Ordinance XX of 1965) of the Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 registered at Police Station, Piplan District Mianwali.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 06.02.2019 at about 07:30 a.m., they along with their eight nominated and 3/4 unknown accused, while armed with fire arm weapons, launched murderous assault upon the police raiding party and caused fire arm injury to Abdul Rasheed, constable and also little damage to the official vehicles. Hence, this case was registered.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Deputy Prosecutor General appearing for the State and perused the record with their able assistance.
4. Though the petitioners are nominated in the crime report yet they have been assigned the joint role of firing at police raiding party whereas, their co-accused Mazhar Shehzad was specifically alleged to have caused fire arm injury to Abdul Rasheed, constable. During investigation, 47-crime empties of different bores were recovered from the place of occurrence but none of the empties were designated to be the empties of official weapons could be secured especially when police officer responded and made cross-firing for fifteen minutes. We have observed that about a dozen trained police officials while armed with respective official fire arm weapons conducted raid but surprisingly, they could not arrest any of the accused nominated in the crime report except Mazhar Shehzad, who had received fire arm injury at the spot. The petitioners were arrested in this case on 25.02.2019 and during investigation the recovery of fire arm weapons was shown against them but its connection with the alleged offence shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording the evidence especially when no report of the Ballistic Expert is available on record. The petitioners are behind the bars since arrest and their physical custody is not required to the police any more for fursther investigation. Gathering, all these facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case for further inquiry into the petitioners guilt under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. In view of what has been discussed above, the petition in hand is allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (rupees one lac) each with one surety each in like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. SA/Z-22/L Bail granted.