MLD 1992

1992 PLP 1668 (MLD)

FAROOZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Cr.Misc. No.4540‑B of 1991, decided on 23rd December, 1991.
Honorable Judges
Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1992 PLP 1668 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J
Parties FAROOZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
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 1992 PLP 1668 (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 1992 PLP 1668 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 1668 (MLD) (FAROOZ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Farooq Amjid Mir for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing; 23rd December, 1991.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑S.498‑‑‑Pre‑arrest bail‑‑‑Case had been fixed for evidence before the Special Court‑‑‑Allegation against accused was of having abetted the crime‑‑ Accused did not press for bail and requested for being taken into custody and sent to jail in view of strong apprehension that he might be done away with in some fictitious police encounter‑‑‑Request of accused was acceded to accordingly. Mian Najum‑uz‑Zaman, Asst. A.‑G. for the State.

Judgment & Decree

Mian Najum‑uz‑Zaman, Asst. A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing; 23rd December, 1991. This petition was called at 8‑30 a.m. Noor Muhammad S.I., Police Station Samundri, appeared in response to the call by the learned Assistant Advocate‑General and informed that the file of the case was lying in the Court of Judge Special Court for Speedy Trials No.I1, Lahore, as the case has been notified for trial by Judge, Special Court for Speedy Trials. As he did not know what evidence the Police had collected against the petitioner, the AA.‑G. expressed inability to say anything regarding the allegations/the evidence collected against the petitioner during investigation. The A.A.‑G. was asked to send for the file from the Court. Mr. Munawar Hussain, Secretary to the Judge, Special Court for Speedy Trials No.1l appeared with the record on being asked by the Assistant Advocate‑General.

2. Before the petition could be argued on merits, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the case has been fixed for evidence before the Judge, Special Court for Speedy Trials for 11th of January, 1992, he would not press the petition in case a direction is issued by the Court that the petitioner be taken into custody and sent to jail. He stated that the request was being made on account of the strong apprehensions of the petitioner that the might be done away with in some fictitious police encounter.

3. The learned A.A.-G, brushed aside the apprehensions of the petitioner. According to him, there was no question of the petitioner being 11.6rdcrcd in any encounter. On being asked, he offered that if the petitioner surrenders, Noor Muhammad Sub‑Inspector, who happens to be working at the concerned police station, will take him into custody and send him to jail at Lahore where the other accused of the case are being kept. He stated that as the allegation against the petitioner is of having abetted the crime there will be no point for asking his personal remand as no recovery was to be effected. The S.I. also agreed that in view of the allegations levelled against the petitioner no recovery has got to be effected from him. He undertook that if the petitioner surrenders, he will arrest him and get him lodged in the jail after obtaining necessary orders from a Magistrate for production later before the Hon'ble Judge, Special Court for Speedy Trials No.II.

4. The petition is disposed of as having not been pressed. The Sub- Inspector and the learned Assistant Advocate‑General have been asked to abide by the undertakings given by them.

5. The request of the Sub‑Inspector that he be allowed to carry the police file with him as he would require that for obtaining judicial remand of the accused is allowed. The papers pertaining to the case, minus the police file, shall be returned to Mr. Munawar Hussain, Secretary. The Sub‑Inspector shall return the police file to the Secretary today if be is available in the Court or tomorrow during Court hours.

6. A photostat copy of this order shall be given free of cost to Noor Muhammad, Sub‑Inspector. N.H.Q/F‑32/L Order accordingly.