2008 PLP 1633 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD AZAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 1633 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AZAM — 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 1633 (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 2008 PLP 1633 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1633 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD AZAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Naveed Inayat Malik for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 148 & 149
Effect
On the factual aspect, case of accused was not distinguishable from co-accused who had already been admitted to bail, on the ground that his case fell within the ambit of further inquiry
Once it was found that case of accused fell within the ambit of further inquiry, then as a. matter of right he was entitled to the concession of bail and even if accused had remained fugitive from law for a couple of months, said conduct of accused could not be treated as hurdle in the grant of relief of bail
Accused was directed to be released on bail, in circumstances. Saeed Ashraf Warraich, Addl. P.G. Bashir Ahmed, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM -UZ-ZAMAN, J.
This is second application seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.237 of 2005 dated 29-4-2005 (cross version) for the offence under sections 302/324/148/149 P.P.C. registered at Police Station Liaqatabad, Lahore. Earlier bail application of the petitioner i.e. Criminal Miscellaneous No.7160-B of 2007 was withdrawn on 1-11-2007. Now this second application seeking post-arrest bail has been filed on the ground that case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the co-accused namely Abbas Ali who has already been admitted to bail by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.866-B of 2006 vide order dated 1-3-2006. Learned Addl. P.G. after going through the record candidly conceded to the proposition laid down by learned counsel for the petitioner but added that petitioner remained fugitive from law for a couple of months and to this extent case of the petitioner is distinguishable from the case of said co-accused.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I have observed that on the factual aspect, case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the co-accused namely Abbas Ali who has already been admitted to bail by this Court because his case was covered within the ambit of further inquiry. Learned Addl. P.G. while opposing the application has argued that since petitioner had remained fugitive from law for a couple of months, he is not entitled for any discretionary relief. But I am afraid this contention has no force because once it is held that case of the petitioner falls within the ambit of further inquiry, then as a matter of right he is entitled to the concession of bail and said conduct of the petitioner could not be treated as a hurdle in the grant of said relief. Accordingly while allowing this petition, it is directed that petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds amounting to Rs.100,000 (rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judicial) of this Court. H.B.T./M-106/L Bail granted.