YLR 2003

2003 PLP 2379(1) (YLR)

NAVEED AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1304-B of 2002/BWP, decided on 27th January, 2003.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2003 PLP 2379(1) (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J
Parties NAVEED AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 2379(1) (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 2003 PLP 2379(1) (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 2379(1) (YLR) (NAVEED AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Mohandra for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (,XLV of 1860), Ss.337-A(iii)/337-H(ii)/452

Bail, grant of-- Occurrence according to F.I.R. was a sudden affair

Accused neither had fired at the complainant nor he repeated the blow

No recovery had been effected from the accused

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Hafiz Muhammad Asghar Laung for the State.

Judgment & Decree

S. 497

Penal Code (,XLV of 1860), Ss.337-A(iii)/337-H(ii)/452

Bail, grant of-- Occurrence according to F.I.R. was a sudden affair

Accused neither had fired at the complainant nor he repeated the blow

No recovery had been effected from the accused

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Mohandra for Petitioner. Hafiz Muhammad Asghar Laung for the State. The petitioner has sought his post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.586 registered at Police Station Saddar, Rahimyar Khan on 7-10-2002 for offences under sections 452/ 34/337-H(ii)/337-A(iii), P.P.C.

2. The precise allegation against the petitioner is that he gave a blow on the nose of complainant with the butt of his pistol. Resultantly, nasal bone of the complainant was fractured.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It has been noticed that the petitioner was arrested on 5-11-2002 and was confined in jail after completion of investigation. A perusal of the F.I.R. shows that it was a sudden affair; neither the petitioner fired at the complainant nor he repeated the blow. No recovery has been effected from him. Considering all these circumstances I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./N-311/L Bail granted.