1994 PLP 1296 (MLD)
UMAR DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1296 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | UMAR DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 1296 (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 1994 PLP 1296 (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: 1994 PLP 1296 (MLD) (UMAR DIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Atta-ul-Mohsin Lak for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/148/149
Bad, grant of
Role attributed to accused was one of proverbial "Lalkara"
Accused was empty handed at the time of occurrence and did not cause any injury to the deceased
Two co-accused having been attributed similar role had already been allowed bail
In view of the rule of consistency and the minor role attributed to accused he was also released on bail.
Judgment & Decree
This is a petition for granting bail to Umar Din, petitioner, who stands arrested since 23-2-1993, in case F.I.R. No.27/93, dated 18-2-1993, under section 302/148/149, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Wando, District Gujranwala, at the instance of Muhammad Ashraf, brother of Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Asghar, deceased in this case.
2. According to the prosecution, Umar Din, petitioner, had abused the women-folk of the complainant. The complainant party in order to launch protest against the conduct of Umar Din went to the Haveli of Ghulam Hussain, where a Punchayat was held to sort out the said incident. During the proceedings, it is alleged, the petitioner raised a Lalkara instigating his nephews that the persons who have come to protest against his conduct be killed. In pursuance of the Lalkara, Muhammad Ashraf fired a shot with his .12 bore gun at Asghar who fell dead. Muhammad Aslam, the other deceased went upstairs in order to capture the murderer Muhammad Ashraf but the latter fired another shot and killed Muhammad Aslam as well on the repeated Lalkara of Umar Din, petitioner.
3. The petitioners bail plea was declined by the lower Court, hence this petition,
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for State and also perused the record.
5. The role attributed to the petitioiner is one of proverbial Lalkara. Admittedly he was empty-handed at the time of occurrence. He did not cause any injury to either of the deceased. It may be mentioned that earlier I had allowed bail to Muhammad Akhtar and Muhammad Amjad, co-accused of the petitioner (in Criminal Miscellaneous No.3439/B of 1993) who were attributed similar role. In the circumstances applying the rule of 'consistency and also minor role attributed to the petitioner, I feel inclined to allow this petition and direct that the petitioner be released subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Gujranwala. Learned counsel for the complainant has pointed out that challan in the case has since been submitted, therefore, a direction be given to the trial Court for concluding the trial expeditiously. Ordered accordingly. N.H.Q./U-32/L Bail granted