PCRLJ 1995

1995 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD PARVEZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
27th November 1994
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1995 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUHAMMAD PARVEZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 P Cr (PLP)?

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: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD PARVEZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Rana Maqbul Ahmad Khan for Petitioner

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art.3

Bail, 9: ant of

In the absence of any measuring scale or apparatus quantum of the alleged recovery of the heroin being 11 grams was only by approximation and falling within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C. was patently doubtful

Despite the advance information no public witness was associated " it h the recovery proceedings nor any effort in that regard appeared to have been made

Accused had already suffered nearly four months in prison and he was not required by the Investigating Agency

Trial of the case was utterly out sight

Contentions of accused having not been controverted by the prosecution the accused was allowed bail.

Judgment & Decree

S. 497

Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art.3

Bail, 9: ant of

In the absence of any measuring scale or apparatus quantum of the alleged recovery of the heroin being 11 grams was only by approximation and falling within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C. was patently doubtful

Despite the advance information no public witness was associated " it h the recovery proceedings nor any effort in that regard appeared to have been made

Accused had already suffered nearly four months in prison and he was not required by the Investigating Agency

Trial of the case was utterly out sight

Contentions of accused having not been controverted by the prosecution the accused was allowed bail. Rana Maqbul Ahmad Khan for Petitioner Ch. Muhammad Ishaq for the State. Post-arrest bail is being-sought by the petitioner having been arrested in the case registered vide F.I.R. No.147 of 2-8-1994 under Articles 3 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 at Police Station Pul 111 Junubi, District Sargodha alleging recovery of 11 grams of heroin from petitioner's possession upon a tip off around 2-30 p.m.

2. Contending that in the absence of any measuring scale or apparatus quantum of the alleged recovery is only by approximation therefore, its engulfment within the prohibitory clause is patently doubtful, despite the advance information no public witness was associated with the alleged recovery nor any effort in that regard appears to have been made thus renders the same doubtful, with the submission of challan is, no more required by the Investigating Agency on which count he has already suffered nearly four months incarceration with trial of the case being utterly out of sight.

3. Which has been opposed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State reiterating the prosecution story without joining issue with the contentions urged.

4. Consequently persuaded by the submissions made petitioner is allowed bail upon furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.30,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./M-1882/L Bail granted.