2006 PLP 2388 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD WASEEM alias BUBBLE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2388 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD WASEEM alias BUBBLE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 2388 (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 2006 PLP 2388 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2388 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD WASEEM alias BUBBLE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 497 & 103
Prohibition (Enforce ment of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts.3 & 4
Complainant had violated provisions of S.103, Cr. P. C. with impunity
Prima facie, offence with which accused had been involved, did not attract provisions of prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Report of Chemical Examiner was yet to be received
Guilt or innocence of accused would be determined by the Trial Court after recording of evidence
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Rana Muhammad Shakil for the State with Muhammad Aslam A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.
The petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.160, registered with Police Station Haram Gate, Multan on 30-12-2005 for an offence under Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979.
2. Succinctly, as per F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioner is that he was caught red-handed while he was in possession of 21 small bottles and 19 large size bottles of liquor.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been involved in the instant case; that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last three months and no private witness has been associated in the recovery proceedings.
4. Conversely, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed this bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. It has been noticed that the complainant has violated the provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. with impunity; prima facie, the offence with which the petitioner has been involved does not attract the provisions of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.; the report of the Chemical Examiner is yet to be received. The guilt or otherwise of the petitioner would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence. In the circumstances, the petitioner is admitted; to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-296/L Bail granted.