1989 PLP 2952 (MLD)
M. RAFI Alias NAUSHA KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 2952 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Nisar, J. |
| Parties | M. RAFI Alias NAUSHA KHAN — 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 2952 (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 2952 (MLD)?
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: 1989 PLP 2952 (MLD) (M. RAFI Alias NAUSHA KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Fazal Haq Gujar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302--Bail, grant of--Circumstantial evidence--Deceased last seen in company of accused--V.C.R. the cause of murder recovered from house of accused at his pointing out--Accused trying to sell away the V.C.R.--Bail refused in circumstances. [ Muhammad Shahnawaz Khan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Rafi alias Nosha Khan who is charged for the murder of Nazir Masih deceased has applied for bail.
2. The prosecution case is that on 19-12-1988 a dead body was recovered from a water-course in the area of Village Dogerai Kalan (P.S. Batapur) Lahore. It was bearing injuries on the neck, forehead and head. The assailant is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner was arrested on 29-1-1989 on the basis of last seen evidence and recovery of VCR at his instance and also of blood-stained bricks. During investigation it came to light that Nazir Masih deceased had obtained a V C R from Aslam Masih P.W. which he had delivered to the petitioner who was not returning the same and he took him along on the pretext of returning the V.C.R. and murdered him in the fields. Yousaf Masih, Salman Masih and Pooran Masih appeared before the police claiming to have last seen the deceased in the company of the petitioner, Aslam Masih deposed about having lent the V.C.R. on hire to the deceased. Haseeb-ud-Din deposed that the petitioner had approached him for the sale of the V.C.R. Inayat Masih and Razzaq A.S.I. are witnesses to the recovery of the said V.C.R. at the instance of the petitioner. Inayat Masih is also a witness to the recovery of bricks at the pointation of the petitioner.
3. It is contended that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., circumstantial evidence has been fabricated and the petitioner have been involved on account of suspicion only.
4. The prosecution has collected evidence against the petitioner from various sources, the V C R which allegedly led to the murder has been recovered from the house of the petitioner at his instance. He allegedly tried to sell away the said V.C.R to Haseeb-ud-Din P.W. Furthermore there is evidence of last seen against him. In the presence of the above circumstances, the petitioner is not considered entitled to bail at this stage and accordingly his application is dismissed. SA./M-1409/L Bail refused.