2000 PLP 2094 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD JAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2000 PLP 2094 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD JAN‑‑‑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 2094 (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 2094 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 2094 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD JAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Zafar for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing; 30th September, 1999.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/148/149/34/109‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Further inquiry‑‑‑Two versions‑‑‑Accused was not named in the F.I.R.‑‑‑One of the eye witnesses gave a different version of the incident during investigation whereas in the second version the accused, who were nominated in the F.I.R., were exonerated and the present accused was shown as the real culprit‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Where there were two versions on the record, such fact alone was sufficient to make the case of the accused as that of further inquiry‑‑‑Bail was allowed to the accused in circumstances. Mazhar Sajjad Sheikh for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal case F.I.R. No.61 of 1998; dated 29‑5‑1998 under sections 302/ 148/149/34/109 PPC was registered at Police Station Harnoli, Distt Mianwali, on the report of Shamsher Ali. The complainant and his father Bashir were tenants of one Khan Gul. They both had gone to irrigate their lands on 29‑5‑1998 at about 1‑00 a.m. At about 4‑30 a.m. Muhammad Bashir went towards outlet of the water‑channel and was followed by the complainant and Khan Gul. It is alleged that Abdul Malik, Muhammad Amir, Muhammad Sabir, Ashiq, Sardar and Afzal armed with shot guns started firing at Bashir. The shot fired by Muhammad Sabir hit Muhammad Bashir who fell down. The accused thereafter resorted to indiscriminate firing and thereafter went away.
2. Subsequently, Khan Gul, made a statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. before the Investigating Officer, which was to the effect that Muhammad Jan petitioner had fired at Muhammad Bashir and had murdered him while Habibullah was armed with a stick and had raised a lalkara at the time of incident. Ahmad Nawaz, brother of Shamsher Ali complainant and Muhammad Zaman also supported the version of Khan Gul.
3. The petitioner was arrested and has applied for grant of bail to him. Learned Counsel .for the petitioner as well as the State have been heard and record seen.
4. The name of the petitioner does not figure in the first information report which was recorded at 7‑00 a.m. on 29‑5‑1998. Subsequently, certain witnesses including Khan Gul whose name is mentioned in 'the first information report as one of the eye witnesses gave a different version of the incident. In the second version, the accused who were named in the first information report were exonerated and Muhammad Jan, present petitioner and one Habibullah were shown as the real culprit. There are two versions on record. In the first version, the petitioner was not named as accused while in the second version he was ascribed fatal shot to the deceased. There being two versions on record, this fact alone is sufficient to make the case of the petitioner as that of further inquiry.
5. The petitioner under the circumstances is allowed bail in the sum of rupees one lac with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. Q.M.H./M.A.K./M‑248/L Bail granted,