1994 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. SHARIFAN BIB, — petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. SHARIFAN BIB, — petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. SHARIFAN BIB, — petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Aftab Ahmad Bajwa for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal code (XLV of 1860), S.302
Accused being awoman was entitled to bail under the first proviso of S.497, Cr. P.C.
Despite the lapse of more than two years the trial had not so far concluded
Accused had six children, four of them were school-going and the case was unusual hardship for her
Accused was granted bail in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Aftab Ahmad Bajwa for Petitioner. Suboh Saeed for the State. Date of hearing: 29th August, 1994. This bail application has been filed by Mst. Sharifan Bibi under section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested under F.I.R. No.154/1992, dated 11-6-1992 registered at the Police Station Wahdat Colony on the charge of murder of her husband, Muhammad Anwar, in collusion with her co-accused, Muhammad Altaf. The bail has been refused -by the learned Sessions Judge, vide order, dated 29-6-1994.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has not been named in F.I.R. There is no direct or indirect evidence available on the record to implicate the petitioner in the murder of Muhammad Anwar. He also contends that this is a blind murder and the last seen evidence has been recorded after six days of the occurrence. He further contends that there is no confessional statement of the petitioner on the record. He states that the petitioner is a woman and entitled to bail under the first proviso of section 497, Cr.P.C., she is confined in jail for more than two years, two months and fifteen days and the trial has yet not been concluded. Thus, she is also otherwise entitled to bail on the statutory grounds.
3. Learned counsel for the State contends that in this case, the petitioner is being held under a very serious charge of section 302, P.P.C.'He contends that the Police investigation shows that she has committed the murder of her husband with the assistance of Muhammad Altaf. He further contends that the trial has already commenced and part of the evidence has been taken and it is likely to be concluded soon. Both the counsel cited case-law in support of their respective arguments.
4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Without making any observation on the merits of the case, it is sufficient to say that the petitioner is a woman and entitled to bail under the first proviso of section 497, Cr.P.C. and also the period of more than two years has passed, and the trial has not been concluded so far. A Furthermore, she has six children, four of them are school-going children. Thus, it is a case of unusual hardship for the mother. The bail is granted provided she furnishes bail bonds in the amount of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Sadar; Lahore. N.H.Q./S-525/L Bail granted.