2009 PLP 927 (YLR)
GULSHAIR alias GUL MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2009 PLP 927 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rana Zahid Mahmood, J |
| Parties | GULSHAIR alias GUL MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 927 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 927 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rana Zahid Mahmood, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 927 (YLR) (GULSHAIR alias GUL MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mehr Tanvir Ahmad for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324/337-H(ii)/148/149
Accused, according to investigation, was neither armed at the time of occurrence nor had he fired at the complainant
Co- accused was found to have fired a shot with his gun on the complainant hitting with pellets on various parts of his body, whereas through a loose net accused had been falsely involved
Accused was simply present at the scene of occurrence and his case needed further inquiry
Bail was allowed to accused in circumstances. 2008 YLR 1964 ref. Ch. Zulfiqar Ali Sidhu, Addl. P.-G. with Fida Hussain Bukhari, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
RANA ZAHID MAHMOOD, J.--This is post-arrest bail application after its rejection by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh, vide order dated 11-7-2008, in case F.I.R. No.87/2008, dated 16-3-2008 registered under sections 324/337-H(ii), 148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Qureshi, Tehsil and District Muzaffargarh, wherein it is alleged that petitioner after the fire with .12 bore gun on the complainant by Muhammad Iqbal co-accused also fired at the complainant which hit him on different parts of body.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the police investigation petitioner has been found innocent even by the DSP vide Zimni No.11, dated 20-6-2008 and the finding is that he had not fired on the complainant and was empty handed, however, was simply present at' the scene of occurrence. The learned counsel, therefore, submitted that case against the petitioner requires further inquiry and he is entitled to bail and referred to 2008 YLR 1964.
3. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General has opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R. and offence falls within prohibitory clause.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
5. The police has come to the conclusion during investigation that petitioner was neither armed nor fired on the complainant and it was only one gun fire shot on the complainant by Muhammad Iqbal co-accused and pellets had hit the complainant on various parts of his body; whereas through loose net the petitioner has been involved falsely. However, he was simply present at the scene of occurrence. Case law referred to above is applicable on all fours to the case in hand. Case against the petitioner requires further inquiry. This petition is, therefore, accepted and the petitioner is granted bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. Fifty thousands with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Magistrate. N.H.Q./G-51/L Bail allowed.