1989 P Cr (PLP)
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J |
| Parties | |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 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 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- G.M. Durrani for Respondents Nos.1 and 2.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497 (5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302,148 & 149‑‑ Bail, cancellation of‑‑‑Medical Officer who examined dead body of deceased not yet examined in case and it was not very clear from post‑mortem report as to what were number of injuries suffered by deceased‑‑Trial Court directed to examine medical officer who carried post‑mortem of dead body and thereafter cancellation of bail of accused could be considered by Trial Court in the light of such evidence. Ali Akbar for Applicant. M.A.I. Qarni for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497 (5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302,148 & 149‑‑ Bail, cancellation of‑‑‑Medical Officer who examined dead body of deceased not yet examined in case and it was not very clear from post‑mortem report as to what were number of injuries suffered by deceased‑‑Trial Court directed to examine medical officer who carried post‑mortem of dead body and thereafter cancellation of bail of accused could be considered by Trial Court in the light of such evidence. Ali Akbar for Applicant. G.M. Durrani for Respondents Nos.1 and
2. M.A.I. Qarni for the State. This application for cancellation of bail of accused Sanwan son of Bangul and Ellahi Bux son of Bangul is filed by complainant Noordin in a case which is registered against the respondents alongwith several others under sections 302/148, 149, P.P.C. The grievance of the complainant applicant in this application is that the learned Sessions Judge has enlarged the two respondents on bail by order dated 6‑3‑1985 and 24‑3‑1985 respectively on the ground that the ocular evidence in the case is in conflict with the medical evidence. The learned counsel for the State as well as respondents admit that the medical officer, who carried the post‑mortem of the dead body of deceased Ayub has not yet been examined in the case. It is also not very clear from the post‑mortem report (photostat copy whereof is available on record) as to what were the number of the injuries suffered by the deceased. In circumstances it will only be appropriate that the present application for cancellation of bail of the two accused is considered by the trial Court after the examination of the medical, officer who carried on the post‑mortem of the deceased. I accordingly direct that the evidence of the medical officer in the case may bell recorded first before examining ether prosecution witnesses and thereafter the cancellation of the bail of the two respondents may be, considered by the trial. Court in the light of such evidence which may come in the case. It may be mentioned here that police papers were called for in this case but the police papers recovered do not pertain to this case. The application is rejected subject to above, observations. M.Y.H/N‑83/K Petition refused.