2008 PLP 231 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD BILAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 231 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD BILAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 231 (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 2008 PLP 231 (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: 2008 PLP 231 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD BILAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Bilal Butt for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.452/427/448/511/337-H(ii)/148/149
Civil litigation inter-se the parties instituted by the sister of accused qua the property in dispute was pending in which status quo order had been passed
In view of the pendency of said litigation there was a distinct possibility of mala fides qua false involvement of the accused in the present case
All other co-accused had been granted bail
Interim pre-arrest bail already granted to accused was confirmed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
SH. AZMAT SAEED, J.
Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.238 of 2007, dated 20-7-2007 under sections 452, 427, 448, 511, 337-H(ii), 148, 149, P.P.C. at Police Station Alpa District Multan.
2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, is that the petitioner-Muhammad Bilal armed with .12-bore gun along with 18 others also armed with deadly weapons and sotas, after having formed an unlawful assembly criminally trespassed into the house of the complainant and caused injuries to him as well as the other P.Ws.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a civil suit is pending inter se the parties in respect of the property whereat the alleged occurrence took place and in the said civil suit, a status quo order had been granted against the complainant party. Adds that the offences do not attract the prohibitory clause. All the other co-accused of the petitioner have already been granted bail.
4. Learned counsel for the prosecution and the complainant contested the grant of bail to the petitioner. It is contended that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. a specific role is attributed to him and no ground for pre-arrest bail is made out.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. It appears that there is a civil litigation inter se the parties filed by petitioner's sister in respect of the property whereat the alleged occurrence took place. Apparently, a status quo order has been passed in the said case. In view of the pendency of the said litigation, there is a distinct possibility of mala fide qua false involvement of the petitioner. All the other co-accused have been granted bail. Consequently, this petition is accepted and the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order, dated 24-9-2007 is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q./M-547/L Pre-arrest bail allowed.