MLD 2022

2022 PLP 101 (MLD)

NOOR MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2021-July-1
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2022 PLP 101 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties NOOR MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2022 PLP 101 (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 2022 PLP 101 (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: 2022 PLP 101 (MLD) (NOOR MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Malik Athar Yar Khan Awan for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 109, 148 & 149

Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rioting, armed with deadly weapon, common object

Bail, refusal of

Prompt FIR

Recovery of weapon

Absconsion of accused

Scope

Allegation against accused was that he along with another committed murder of one person and injured another

Accused was nominated in the promptly lodged FIR with the specific allegation

Medical evidence was in line with ocular account

Witnesses had fully implicated the accused in their statements under S.161, Cr.P.C.

Weapon of offence was recovered on the indication of accused

Accused had remained fugitive from law for a period of about ten years

Accused was found guilty during investigation

Case of accused fell within the ambit of prohibitory clause of S.497(2), Cr.P.C.

Accused had failed to point out any ill will or malice on the part of the complainant or police for his false implication in the case

Sufficient material was available on record, which connected the accused with the commission of alleged offence

Petition for grant of post-arrest bail was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

ALI ZIA BAJWA, J.

Through this petition filed under Section 497 Cr.P.C., petitioner Noor Muhammad Khan seeks his post-arrest bail in case FIR No.195, dated 05.12.2010, registered under Sections 302, 324, 109, 148, 149, P.P.C., with Police Station Pai Khel, District Mianwali.

2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner is that on 05.12.2010, at 8:15 a.m., he while armed with Kalashnikov along with his co-accused armed with firearms committed murder of Zareef Khan and caused firearm injuries to Zahid Iqbal.

3. Arguments heard and record perused.

4. The record reveals that the petitioner is well nominated in the promptly lodged FIR with the specific allegation that he while armed with Kalashnikov along with his co-accused made straight fire shots upon Zareef Khan deceased, which landed on his chest, right flank etc., who succumbed to the injuries at the spot, whereas Zahid Iqbal sustained injuries at the hands of his co-accused. The medical evidence is inline with ocular account. The witnesses have fully implicated the petitioner in their statements under Section 161, Cr.P.C., During the course of investigation, the alleged weapon of offence i.e. Kalashnikov was recovered on the pointation of present petitioner. It is also evident from record that the petitioner remained fugitive from law for a considerable period of about ten years. The petitioner was found guilty during investigation by the Investigating Officer. Case of present petitioner falls within the ambit of prohibition contained in Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. The petitioner has failed to point out any ill-will or malice on the part of complainant or police for his false implication in this case. Sufficient incriminating material is available on record, which connects the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence.

5. The upshot of above discussion leads me to the conclusion that on the face of the record, there are reasonable grounds to believe that petitioner has committed an offence which entails capital punishment Resultantly, this petition for post-arrest bail having no substance stands dismissed. SA/N-21/L Bail declined.