1989 PLP 843 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD ASGHAR and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 843 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASGHAR and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 843 (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 1989 PLP 843 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 843 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD ASGHAR and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Muhammad Ilyas for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 304‑‑Explosive substances Act (IV of 1908), Ss. 3 & 5‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Deceased was forced by accused to break scrap‑ Iron piece exploding when struck with hammer resulting in death of deceased‑ Complainant m statement under S.164, Cr.P.C. stated that his brother (deceased) died accidentally‑‑Other witnesses had no knowledge of occurrence‑‑Bail allowed in circumstances. Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 304‑‑Explosive substances Act (IV of 1908), Ss. 3 & 5‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Deceased was forced by accused to break scrap‑ Iron piece exploding when struck with hammer resulting in death of deceased‑ Complainant m statement under S.164, Cr.P.C. stated that his brother (deceased) died accidentally‑‑Other witnesses had no knowledge of occurrence‑‑Bail allowed in circumstances. Mian Muhammad Ilyas for Petitioners. Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.‑G. for the State. This is a petition for bail on behalf of Muhammad Asghar and Nisar Ahmad petitioners who are accused in a case under section 304, P.P.C. and sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.
2. The F.I.R. version is that five/six days prior to the registration of the case the petitioners brought a truck load of scrap from Qjri Camp and kept it in a plot adjacent to the house of Muhammad Arif complainant. They employed Muhammad Ashraf, brother of the complainant, as a labourer and asked him to break a bomb‑like piece of iron. He declined, upon which they insisted and told him that he will not be paid wages. Muhammad Ashraf then struck a hammer blow on the piece of iron which exploded causing him injury on the head, as a result of which he died in Mayo Hospital. Leg of Muhammad Asghar petitioner was also injured. In the F.I.R. it was stated that the incident had taken place due to negligence of the petitioners. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Arif complainant, Altaf Hussain and Muhammad Sadiq P.Ws.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and section 304, P.P.C. are not attracted to the facts of this case and that all the eye‑witnesses, including the complainant, have made statements under section 164, Cr.P.C. exonerating the petitioners. In view of the statements of the alleged eye‑witnesses under section 164, Cr.P.C., the learned Additional Advocate‑General does not oppose the prayer for bail. 4.In the statements under section 164, Cr.P.C. first informant Muhammad Arif has stated that his brother died accidentally while Muhammad Sadiq and Altaf Hussain have stated that they have no knowledge about this occurrence. In I the circumstances, the petitioners are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Duty Magistrate/Assistant Commissioner, Lahore Sadar. SA./M‑1153/L Bail allowed.