1988 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUR RASHID alias SHEEDA‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J |
| Parties | ABDUR RASHID alias SHEEDA‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 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 1988 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: 1988 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUR RASHID alias SHEEDA‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Bashir Hussain Khalid for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 307‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Injured person received 6 injuries in all out of which one injury caused on vital part of body resulting in paralysis, restricting movement of victim of assault‑‑Bail refused, in circumstances. Ghulam Mustafa for the State. Mehr Ghulam Ali Mubashar for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 307‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Injured person received 6 injuries in all out of which one injury caused on vital part of body resulting in paralysis, restricting movement of victim of assault‑‑Bail refused, in circumstances. Ch. Bashir Hussain Khalid for Petitioner. Ghulam Mustafa for the State. Mehr Ghulam Ali Mubashar for the Complainant. The prosecution case in brief is that Abdur Rashid alias Sheeda petitioner on 28‑4‑1987 at about 2‑30 p.m. on Eid Gah Road Rehmanpura gave knife blows to Abdur Rauf. The motive was stated to be that one Muhammad Rafique used to visit the house of the complainant for recitation of Quran but Abdul Rashid accused did not appreciate that visit because Rafique had divorced his maternal‑cousin. Abdul Rauf received six sharp‑edged weapon injuries on his person out of which injury No.6 on back was grievous in nature. The injury had resulted in paralysis restricting the movement of the injured.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the record. It is correct that at the time of occurrence the age of petitioner was less than 16 years. His date of birth is 18‑8‑1971. He is more than 16 years at this moment. The injured received six injuries in all. Injury No.6 is on vital part of the body and was grievous in nature. The case against the petitioner is not that of further enquiry. It cannot be said at this stage that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accused has committed a non‑bailable offence. I, therefore, relying on Arbab Ali v. Khamisu 1985 S C M R 195 dismiss this petition. S.G.D./A‑237/L Bail refused.