1987 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM JEELANI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J |
| Parties | GHULAM JEELANI‑‑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: Qurban Sadiq Ikram, 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 JEELANI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rab Nawaz Noon for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Further inquiry‑‑Accused admittedly empty‑handed at time of occurrence and only Lalkara and holding deceased into clasp attributed to him‑‑ Whether accused shared common intention to kill, with his co‑accused being a question requiring further inquiry, bail granted in circumstances. M. Nawaz Abbasi, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 49/B of 1987, decided on 7th February, 1987. ‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Further inquiry‑‑Accused admittedly empty‑handed at time of occurrence and only Lalkara and holding deceased into clasp attributed to him‑‑ Whether accused shared common intention to kill, with his co‑accused being a question requiring further inquiry, bail granted in circumstances. Rab Nawaz Noon for Petitioner. M. Nawaz Abbasi, A.A.‑G. for the State. In brief the prosecution case is that on 19‑11‑1986 at about morning time Ghulam Abbas complainant alongwith Saeed Akhtar and Akhtar was present at the wagon stand Taxila waiting to proceed to village Kanial. At about 9 a.m. Shahzad accused armed with hatchet and Ghulam Jilani accused empty‑handed came there. They shouted Lalkara. Ghulam Jilani held Saeed Akhtar whereafter Shahzad accused gave two hatchet blows to him. One blow fell on the head and the second on the right thigh of Saeed Akhtar who fell down. The accused ran away. The motive was stated to be that some time before this occurrence Saeed Akhtar injured P.W. had injured Arshad a brother of Shahzad accused for which a case under section 325, 324/34, P.P.C, was registered which is still pending. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.A.‑G. Ghulam Jilani petitioner was empty‑handed, at the time of this occurrence. The only role attributed to him is firstly a Lalkara and secondly he had held Saeed Akhtar in clasp when his co‑accused Shahzad gave him hatchet blow. Ghulam Jilani came to the place of occurrence empty‑handed and as such the question whether he shared common intention with his co‑accused to murder Saeed Akhtar or not makes his case that of further inquiry. He was also found innocent by police during investigation. He is accordingly admitted to bail on his furnishing of bail bonds m the sum of Rs.30,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Rawalpindi. S.A./G‑33/L Bail granted.