1994 P Cr (PLP)
QURBAN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Opponent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | QURBAN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Opponent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (QURBAN and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Opponent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mr. Dhani Bux Dayo, Advocate for the State has conceded that there occurred inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. the explanation for delay, as mentioned in the F.I.R., is not plausible. Mr. Dayo concedes that nobody had sustained injury as a result of the alleged attempt on the life of the complainant by applicant Qurban. He also submitted that there is absolutely no allegation of any kind against the applicant Achar. He, therefore, concedes to the prayer of the applicants for bail.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 307/324/34
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13-D
Enmity existed between the parties
Delay of more than 12 hours had occurred in lodging the F.I.R. and nobody was hurt in the incident
Judgment & Decree
Kazi Azizullah for Applicants. Dhani Bux Dayo for the State. This application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicants Qurban and Achar who have been arrested by the police in connection with a case registered against them under sections 307 and 34, P.P.C. read with section 324, Qisas and Diyat Ordinance and 13-D, Arms Ordinance as Crime No.55 of 1993, A Section, Police Station Nawabshah on the complaint of Muhammad Jumman. An application for bail for the applicants had been moved before the learned Sessions Judge, Nawabshah who by his order dated 2-8-1993 dismissed the same. The case of the prosecution is that complainant Muhammad Jumman had lodged report that about two years back one Nizamuddin Brohi had been murdered in which case his brothers Moula Bux, Lal Khan and cousin Muhammad Ali had been challaned. That on the day of this incident all these persons came to Sessions Court, Nawabshah to attend the hearing. All the accused persons, as they are witnesses in that case, also came there. After some time complainant alongwith Ghulam Rabbani and Umed Ali went to the Canteen within the premises of Sessions Court to take tea where both the applicants/accused came. Qurban applicant took out a pistol from the fold of his Shalwar and fired at the complainant with intention to kill him but the cartridges could not be fixed and in the meanwhile other persons who were there tried to catch hold of him and due to their intervention the loaded pistol fell down and the applicants escaped from there. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that nobody has been hurt as a result of alleged attempt on the life of complainant Muhammad Jumman. It is further contended that there is inordinate delay in lodging the report with the police. Mr. Dhani Bux Dayo, Advocate for the State has conceded that there occurred inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. the explanation for delay, as mentioned in the F.I.R., is not plausible. Mr. Dayo concedes that nobody had sustained injury as a result of the alleged attempt on the life of the complainant by applicant Qurban. He also submitted that there is absolutely no allegation of any kind against the applicant Achar. He, therefore, concedes to the prayer of the applicants for bail. Since there is enmity between the parties and nobody has been hurt and there is delay of more than 12 hours in lodging the report with the police. I think this is a fit case for granting bail to the applicants and consequently, I admit the applicants to bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./Q-84/K Bail allowed.