2007 PLP 361 (YLR)
ZULFIQAR ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 361 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J |
| Parties | ZULFIQAR ALI — 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 2007 PLP 361 (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 2007 PLP 361 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 361 (YLR) (ZULFIQAR ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muntazir Mehdi and Syed Athar Hassan Bukhari for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.334, 337-L(ii) & 34
Bail, grant of--Injury on the person of injured, attributed to accused, had been declared to fall under definition of Itlaf-e-Deant, attracting provisions of S.337-U, P.P.C.
Section 334, P.P.C. was not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of injury and punishment under S.337-U, P.P.C. was Arsh instead of rigorous imprisonment
Accused had been declared innocent by the police and was a previously non-convict
Accused being in jail for the last eight months, keeping him behind the bars for an indefinite period would not serve any purpose
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Zahoor Ahmad and another v. The State 2005 YLR 1664 ref. Rana Khalid Mahmood for the State with Jehangir Ahmad S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.
Seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.17 dated 7-1-2006 registered under sections 334/337-L(ii)/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Seetal Maari, Multan. The allegation against the petitioner is that he allegedly inflicted head blow on the face of the complainant, resultantly his front tooth became extracted along with his co-accused.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case; that he has been declared innocent by the police; that the petitioner was injured and his application for registration of the cross-version is pending before the competent forum and that the petitioner is previously non-convict. Injuries Nos.1 and 2 falling under section 337-L(ii), P.P.C. even attributed to Ishfaq co-accused, who is admitted to pre arrest bail.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the grant of bail.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. Injury No.1 has been declared to fall under the definition of Itlaf-e-Deant attracting provisions of section 337-U, P.P.C. which is attributed to the petitioner. Section 334, P.P.C. is not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of injury and punishment of section 337-U, P.P.C. is Arsh instead of rigorous imprisonment. Reliance is placed on Zahoor Ahmad and another v. The State (2005 YLR 1664). Admittedly the petitioner has been declared innocent by the A police. He is previously non-convict. He is in jail since 19-1-2006. Keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period of time will not serve or advance the prosecution case.
6. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.30,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./Z-13/L Bail granted.