2018 PLP 467 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ZAHID — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2018 PLP 467 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Anwaarul Haq, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ZAHID — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 467 (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 2018 PLP 467 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Anwaarul Haq, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP 467 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ZAHID — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Saqib Mumtaz and Ch. Zeeshan Afzaal Hashmi for Petitioner.
- 2. As per office report, learned counsel for the complainant Mr. Saif Ullah Maan Advocate was duly informed through mobile phone whereas notices Pervi had been issued to him as well as the other counsel Mr. Husnain Haider Advocate. Police official present in Court also confirms that complainant has duly been informed regarding fixation of this matter for today. However, even after repeated calls no one is appearing on behalf of the complainant and I am left with no other option but to decide this petition after hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned law officer.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 337-F(iii), 337-A(i), 109, 148 & 149
Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, hurt, abettor present when offence committed, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly
Accused allegedly fired shots with his pump action gun that injured two persons; subsequently one injured died after more than one month of the occurrence
Medico-legal report of deceased reflected only one injury on his person whereas besides accused, co-accused was also alleged to have fired shots that hit the deceased; there was only one injury on the person of deceased which was attributed to both the accused persons
Two injuries on the persons of injured (attributed to accused) had already been declared offences under Ss. 337-F(i) & 337-A(i), P.P.C.
Deceased as well as all the injured witnesses did not assign any specific role to any of the accused and stated that all the accused made firing due to which they became injured
Accused was behind the bars since one year and had no previous criminal record
No progress in trial
Case against accused fell within purview of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C. and was one of further inquiry into his guilt
Bail was granted accordingly. Ch. Muhammad Mustafa, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State with Nadeem Khalid S.I.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ, J.
Petitioner Muhammad Zahid seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No.245 dated 18.03.2014 registered under sections 302, 324, 337-F(iii), 337A(i), 109 and 148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Aroop District Gujranwala.
2. As per office report, learned counsel for the complainant Mr. Saif Ullah Maan Advocate was duly informed through mobile phone whereas notices Pervi had been issued to him as well as the other counsel Mr. Husnain Haider Advocate. Police official present in Court also confirms that complainant has duly been informed regarding fixation of this matter for today. However, even after repeated calls no one is appearing on behalf of the complainant and I am left with no other option but to decide this petition after hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned law officer.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he fired shots with his pump action gun that hit Muhammad Waris and Muhammad Hussain. Subsequently, Muhammad Hussain expired on 21.04.2014 after more than one month of the occurrence.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. Medico Legal Report of the deceased Muhammad Hussain reflects only one injury on his person i.e. a lacerated wound of entry 3 x 3 cm x bone exposed x going deep on front of left leg upper part whereas besides petitioner co-accused Munir Ahmad is also alleged to have fired shots with his 44-bore rifle that hit Muhammad Hussain. Two injuries on the person of injured Haji Muhammad Waris, attributed to petitioner, have already been declared attracting the offences under sections 337-F(i) and 337-A(i), P.P.C. Muhammad Hussain deceased as well as other injured witnesses Munir Ahmad, Muhammad Kashif and Muhammad Waris in their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. have not assigned any specific role to any of the accused and have stated that all the accused made firing due to which they became injured. As there is only one injury on the person of the deceased that has been attributed to petitioner as well as his co-accused Munir Ahmad and all injured witnesses including Muhammad Hussain deceased in their statements have attributed general role to the petitioner, therefore, case against him prima facie falls within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. and is one of further inquiry into his guilt. Petitioner is behind the bars since 28.12.2016 and police official present in Court states that he has no previous criminal record. Learned counsel for the petitioner states at bar that there is no progress in the trial and not even a single witness has so far been recorded. I, therefore, admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
6. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition. WA/M-190/L Bail granted.