2022 PLP 1834 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD NIAZ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2022 PLP 1834 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sardar Tariq Masood and Muhammad Ali Mazhar, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD NIAZ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2022 PLP 1834 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2022 PLP 1834 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sardar Tariq Masood and Muhammad Ali Mazhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2022 PLP 1834 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD NIAZ — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Aftab Hussain Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner along with Petition (via video link from Lahore).
- Anis Muhammad Shahzad, Advocate Supreme Court (at Principal Seat) and Malik Matee Ullah, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents (via video link from Lahore) (in Criminal M.A. 350-L of 2021).
- Nemo for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 337-H(2), 148 & 149
Punjab Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 11-B
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd
Counsel for injured witness and the accused both admitted that one of the co-accused, who had also fired in the air, similar to the accused, was granted pre-arrest bail, which bail order was subsequently been confirmed by the Court, and was neither challenged by the injured witness nor by the complainant
Case of accused was not distinguishable from the case of the said co-accused granted pre-arrest bail
In such circumstances as per rule of consistency, the accused was also entitled to relief of bail
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was granted pre-arrest bail. Mirza Abid Majeed, D.P.G. Punjab for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, J.
For the reason set out in the application for impleadment (Crl. M.A 350-L/2021) the same is allowed and learned counsel is permitted to argue the case on behalf of Allah Yar.
2. Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 81/2021 dated 04.03.2021, for the offences under sections 324/337-H(2)/148/149, P.P.C. read with section 11-B of the Punjab Arms Amendment Ordinance, 2015, registered at Police Station Rodala Road District Faisalabad. Petitioner was declined pre-arrest bail by the learned High Court vide impugned order.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the newly impleaded respondent (injured) and carefully gone through the available record, we observe that Muhammad Bilal, Niaz Ahmed and two/three unknown persons have specifically been nominated in the FIR, who were firing and one of the fire hit Allah Yar at his left flank. On query, it was admitted by the learned counsel for Allah Yar and also learned counsel for the petitioner that the co-accused Muhammad Bilal has also fired in the air but was granted pre-arrest bail, which has subsequently been confirmed by the Court. We asked from the learned counsel appearing for Allah Yar (injured) and the learned Deputy Prosecutor General Punjab that whether the case of the petitioner is distinguishable from the case of Muhammad Bilal and the answer was no. As Muhammad Bilal was granted pre-arrest bail and the said order was not challenged by Allah Yar and the complainant, and the case of the petitioner is at par with co-accused Muhammad Bilal, therefore, as per rule of consistency, the petitioner is also entitled to relief of bail.
4. Consequently, this petition is converted into an appeal and allowed. The petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing of bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. MWA/M-54/SC Bail granted.