2005 PLP 1664 (YLR)
ZAHOOR AHMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1664 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, J |
| Parties | ZAHOOR AHMAD 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 2005 PLP 1664 (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 2005 PLP 1664 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1664 (YLR) (ZAHOOR AHMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Arshad Latif for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.334 & 34
Accused was behind the bars for the last about more than nine months
Mere commencement of trial, if the case of bail was otherwise made out, would cause no hindrance
Case under S.334, P.P.C. was to be made out if any organ or limb was amputated whereas fingers of hand or toes of foot, were not organs and similarly, teeth were not an organ, but whole jaw was on organ
Case of accused at the most fell under S.337-U, P.P.C.
Case having been made out for grant of bail, accused was allowed bail, in circumstances. Muhammad Shahid v. The State 1997 PCr.LJ 35 and Muhammad, Ismail v. Muhammad Rafiq and another PLD 1989 SC 585 ref. Kareem-ud-Din Khilji for the Complainant. Muhammad Sarwar Awan for the State. Muhammad Naeem A.S.-I. with Record.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioners, Zahoor alias Jara and Sadiq have sought post-arrest bail through this petition in case, F.I.R. No.70 of 2004 dated 21-4-2004 registered on the complaint of Muhammad Javed against the petitioners under section 334/34 P.P.C. at Police Station. Qadirpur Raan, District, Multan, whereby it was alleged that mother of the complainant was assaulted and her front tooth was removed/damaged and for that very matter petitioners were challaned, on 24-6-2004.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that case of the petitioners does not fall within the prohibitory clause relies on " Muhammad Shahid v. The State" 1997 PCr.LJ 35 and contended that though challan has been sent in the Court of competent jurisdiction but mere submission of challan and commencement of trial does not create hindrance in the way if case of the petitioner for bail is made out, relied on "Muhammad Ismail v. Muhammad Rafiq and another" PLD 1989 SC
585. Further contends that the petitioners were stated, to be empty-handed and arrested on 24-6-2004. Petitioners are behind the bars for the last more than nine months.
3. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail petition on the grounds that earlier petitioners moved their post-arrest bail before this. Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn after some arguments vide order dated 15-9-2004. Further contend that case of the petitioners fall within prohibitory clause and challan has been submitted and trial has commenced.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record. Petitioners have been sent behind the bars for the last about more than nine months. Respectfully relying on "Muhammad Ismail v. Muhammad Rafiq and another" PLD 1989 SC 585 and "Muhammad Shahid v. The State" 1997 PCr.LJ 35 that mere commencement of trial, if the case of petitioners is otherwise made out does not hinder in the way. Moreover, case under section 334, P.P.C. is' made out if any organ or limb is amputated whereas fingers of hand or toes of foot are not organs and similarly, teeth are not an organ, the whole jaw is an. organ. So, the petitioner's case at the most falls under section 337-U, P.P.C. For what has been discussed above the case of petitioners is made out of bail resultantly the petitioners is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
5. However, the observation made in this petition shall not affect the proceedings in trial and the trial shall be concluded purely on, merits. H.B.T./Z-82/L Bail granted.