1987 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM SADIQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | GHULAM SADIQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM SADIQ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34--Right of self-defence- Exceeding of--Grant of bail--Deceased a thief--Committing non-bailable, cognizable offence in view of accused--Accused party tried to apprehend--Deceased resisted by causing injuries to accused--Accused when arrested was found injured--Question of guilt of accused via-a-via right of self-defence and exceeding same, held, required further enquiry--Bail, therefore, was allowed. Ch. Nazir Ahmad Bhatti for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Sardar Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Ch. Nazir Ahmad Bhatti for the State. This is an application for bail on behalf of Ghulam Sadiq petitioner in a case under section 302/304/34, P.P.C. registered at P.S. Zahirpir, vide F. I. R. No. 138 of 1982.
2. The prosecution case is that Gamoon deceased alongwith his two companions dishonestly removed 5 buffaloes of the petitioner's party and as such committed theft punishable under section 379, P.P.C. which is a cognizable as well as not bailable offence. The petitioner and others followed him and apprehend him after inflicting him as many as 10 injuries. Thereafter, the petitioner party removed the deceased in injured condition to the hospital. The deceased, however, expired on his way to the hospital.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the deceased was a thief, the petitioner and others were legally competent to apprehend the accused and cause him injuries short of his death and as such the prosecution case accepted at its face value, no offence under section 302, P.P.C. is made out. As against this, the learned counsel for the State has seriously opposed this application on the ground that the petitioner had exceeded the right of self-defence.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find (as stated by Shahbaz Hussain, A.S.I that the deceased was a thief, he committed non-bailable as well as a cognizable offence in view of the petitioner and others that when the petitioner party tried to apprehend him, he resisted and caused injuries to the petitioner. The A.S.I. informs that the petitioner when arrested was found injured and was got medically examined. For what has been found above, I am of the opinion that the questions of the guilt of the accused, right of self-defence and its exceeding require further enquiry. The petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Rahimyar Khan. S. A. /4648/L Bail allowed.