2000 PLP 215 (YLR)
ABDUL RAZZAQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2000 PLP 215 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Muhammad Sabir, J |
| Parties | ABDUL RAZZAQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 215 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 215 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Muhammad Sabir, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 215 (YLR) (ABDUL RAZZAQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/324/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Eight accused had been named in the F.I.R. with separate roles‑‑‑Accused was assigned only the role of Lalkara which was a common feature of the society‑‑‑Although accused, according to the complainant, was armed with a fire‑arm at the time of occurrence yet he had not used the same‑‑‑Involvement of accused in the case required further probe in circumstances and he was admitted to bail accordingly. Mujeeb‑ur‑Rehman for the State.
Judgment & Decree
The petitioner seeks bail after arrest in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.204 of 1996 at Police Station, Burjwala, on 13‑7‑1996. The allegation against the petitioner is only to the extent that he was armed with fire‑arms and raised Lalkara during the occurrence in which three persons were killed namely Muhammad Anwar, Ismail and Razia Bibi. The petitioner in pursuance to the aforesaid F.I.R., was arrested immediately after the occurrence and since then he is in Jail.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that only Lalkara is attributed to the petitioner. He has neither fired at any of the deceased in the air. Learned State Counsel has opposed the grant of bail while submitting that three persons were killed during the occurrence and as such the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Perusal of F.I.R. indicates that Abdul Razzaq petitioner is only attributed Lalkara in the F.I.R., although according to the complainant he was armed with fire‑arms also. He has not used the weapon which he was carrying at the time of occurrence. Involvement on the basis of Lalkara is a common feature of our society. There are total eight accused in this case and separate role is attributed to all of them in the F.I.R. Since the petitioner's role is only to have raised Lalkara at the time of occurrence, therefore, his involvement by invoking provision of section 148/149 read with section 302/324, P.P.C., needs further probe.
4. In view of the circumstances, he is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.2 lacs wit, one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./A‑106/L