1986 PLP 1146 (SCMR)
KHUDA BUKHSH and 6 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1146 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Shafiur Rahman, and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ |
| Parties | KHUDA BUKHSH and 6 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1146 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1146 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Shafiur Rahman, and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1146 (SCMR) (KHUDA BUKHSH and 6 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shahzad Jahangir, Bar-at-Law, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 15th April, 1986.
- Shahzad Jahangir, Bar‑at‑Law, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 16-3-1986 passed by the Lahore High Court, in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 586/R of 1986).
Art. 185(3)--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 497--Bail- Petitioners accused of indiscriminate firing and demolishing Dera of complainant party--Bail denied--Plea that allegation being general and in absence of recovery of fire-arms and specific role assigned to each of them, it was a case of further enquiry, repelled--Petitioners having been named in F.I.R. with definite role of indiscriminate firing, injuring a number of persons, and three of them demolishing Dera, prima facie showed their participation in attack with lethal weapons which was sufficient to deny them concession of bail--No interference called for- Leave to appeal refused. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.‑‑In this petition the allegation against the seven petitioners is that they were armed with fire‑arms and had fired indiscriminately injuring ten persons apart from two others, namely Bashir and Shafi, who had died. There is also the further allegation that petitioners 5 to 7 had demolished the Dera of Ghulam Haider so as to render the possession of the complainant party doubtful. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners was that this was a general allegation, and in the absence of any recovery of fire‑arms and specific role assigned to each of them, it was a case of further enquiry. The fact that their names transpired in the F.I.R. with the definite role that they had fired indiscriminately injuring a number of persons and that three of them had demolished the Dera of Ghulam Haider prima facie shows that they had participated in the attack with Lethal weapons which is sufficient to deny to them the concession of bail. Accordingly, no interference with the order of the High Court is called for. The petition is thus without any merit, and is dismissed. M . I . Petition dismissed.