2002 PLP 3838 (YLR)
REHMAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 3838 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Shaikh Abdur Razzaq and Bashir A. Mujahid, JJ |
| Parties | REHMAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 3838 (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 2002 PLP 3838 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Shaikh Abdur Razzaq and Bashir A. Mujahid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 3838 (YLR) (REHMAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mazahir Ali Akbar Naqvi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 18th October, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Active and effective role had been attributed to absconders, whereas accused had been simply assigned role of instigating his co‑accused‑‑ Accused since his arrest was in judicial lock up‑‑‑Investigation was complete and challan showing main accused persons as absconders had already been sent to Court‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Aftab Ahmad Bajwa for the Complainant. Sadiqua Altaf Khan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Aftab Ahmad Bajwa for the Complainant. Sadiqua Altaf Khan for the State. Date of hearing: 18th October, 2001. SHEIKH ABDUR RAZZAQ, J.‑‑ Petitioner seeks post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 352 of 2000, dated 29‑11‑2000 under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Sitra, District Sialkot.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he instigated his sons Azeem, Ehasn Ullah and Muhammad as well as his nephews Muhammad Saleem and Muhammad Nawaz sons of Ahmad Din who were deadly armed with respective lethal weapons to commit the murder of Muhammad Arshad. The petitioner applied for bail which was declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska, vide order, dated 10‑5‑2001. Hence this petition. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
3. The stand of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that only role attributed to the petitioner is of proverbial Lalkara and he was arrested on 12‑12‑2000 and since then he is in judicial lock‑up that the investigation is complete and challan has been submitted in the Court wherein all other accused have been shown as absconders; that all these facts make the case of the petitioner open for inquiry.
4. Conversely the bail application has been opposed by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned counsel for State and submit that the petitioner has also been attributed similar role in case F.I.R. No.78 of 2000 of same police station and that even thereafter another case vide F.I.R. No.59 of 2001, dated 29‑3‑2001 has been registered against the absconders regarding the murder of third brother of the complainant. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed by him.
5. Perusal of the F.I.R. reveals than active and effective role has been attributed to the absconder and the petitioner has been simply assigned the role of instigating his co accused. The petitioner was arrested on 12‑12‑2000 and since then is in judicial lock up. The Investigation is complete and the challan showing the main accused has absconders has already been sent to the Court. For what has been stated, above the application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. two lacs with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. H.B.T./R‑191/L Bail granted.