1976 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. SHAMSHAD BEGUM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD IRSHAD AND 17 OTHERS‑ — Respondents
| Citation | 1976 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, J |
| Parties | Mst. SHAMSHAD BEGUM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD IRSHAD AND 17 OTHERS‑ — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1976 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 1976 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1976 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. SHAMSHAD BEGUM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD IRSHAD AND 17 OTHERS‑ — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for Petitioner.
- Rafiq Ahmed Bajwa for Respondents No. 11 to 18.
- Date of hearing: 7th May 1975.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑-S. 497(5)‑--Bail, cancellation of‑Investigation already completed and challan filed in Court‑Held, cancellation of bail and arrest of accused at this stage would serve no purpose‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307, 452, 324, 148 & 149‑[Bail]. Respondents Nos. 1 to 10 in person.
Judgment & Decree
Respondents Nos. 1 to 10 in person. Rafiq Ahmed Bajwa for Respondents No. 11 to
18. Date of hearing: 7th May 1975. This is an application by Mst. Shamahad Begum under section 497(5), Cr. P. C. for the cancellation of bail of the respondents Nos. 1 to 17 whose names have been mentioned in the heading of the application.
2. The allegations made against the respondents by Mst. Shamshad Begum petitioner, in the F. I. R. lodged by her on 17‑11‑1974 are briefly that they alongwith some others forced their way into her house situated on the Lower Mall near the new hostel of the Government College, Lahore and caused injuries on her and broke the furniture and the radio in her house.
3. The respondents were granted bail by Muhammad Naseem, Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore by his order dated 15‑3‑1975. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that considering the facts and the nature of the allegation and the injuries caused by the respondents to Mst. Shamshad Begum, the former (i.e. the respondents) should not have been granted bail before arrest by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore. The learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that there is a dispute between the parties for the allotment and possession of some evacuee property and that a day earlier i.e. on 16‑11‑1974 petitioner party bad attacked the house of the respondent party and an F. I. R. had been lodged in that connection and that Mst. Shamshad Begum had lodged the F. I. R. against the respondents on the next day merely as a measure of retaliation. He also submitted that the investigation has already been completed and the police has even filed the challan in the Court of the learned Ilaqa Magistrate.
4. I have gone through the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge granting pre‑arrest bail to the respondents and have also heard the learned counsel for the parties. Considering the facts of the case I find that this is not a case for the reversal of the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, specially in view of the fact that the investigation is already complete and challan has been filed in the Court. The arrest of the respondents at this stage would serve no purpose. The application is, therefore, dismissed. Petition dismissed