1987 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM SABIR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Riaz Ahmad, J |
| Parties | GHULAM SABIR‑‑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: Riaz Ahmad, 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 SABIR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Yusuf Ali Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑None of the accused was named in F.I.R. as culprit but in course of investigation evidence collected against petitioner consisted of extra‑judicial confession and recovery of blood‑stained weapon of offence and blood‑stained clothes of petitioner‑‑ Investigating Officer stating that weapon of offence and clothes of petitioner were opined to be stained with human blood‑‑Petitioner submitting affidavit of complainant exonerating petitioner‑ Crime being unwitnessed, complainant, held, could not exonerate petitioner as that would all depend upon appraisal of evidence by Trial Court‑‑Bail refused. Syed Zulfiqar Haider for the State. Mirza Bashir Ahmad for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302‑‑None of the accused was named in F.I.R. as culprit but in course of investigation evidence collected against petitioner consisted of extra‑judicial confession and recovery of blood‑stained weapon of offence and blood‑stained clothes of petitioner‑‑ Investigating Officer stating that weapon of offence and clothes of petitioner were opined to be stained with human blood‑‑Petitioner submitting affidavit of complainant exonerating petitioner‑ Crime being unwitnessed, complainant, held, could not exonerate petitioner as that would all depend upon appraisal of evidence by Trial Court‑‑Bail refused. Yusuf Ali Khan for Petitioner. Syed Zulfiqar Haider for the State. Mirza Bashir Ahmad for the Complainant. No doubt, that in the F.I.R. none is named as culprit, but in course of investigation the evidence collected against the petitioner consists of extra judicial confession and the recovery of blood‑stained weapon of offence and blood‑stained clothes of the petitioner. It is stated by the Investigating Officer that the weapon of offence and the clothes of the petitioner were opined to be stained with human blood.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the affidavit of the complainant exonerating the petitioner. Unfortunately the complainant cannot exonerate the petitioner because it is an un witnessed crime. It will all depend upon the appraisal of evidence by the trial Court. Accordingly, this petition has no merit and is dismissed.
3. Learned Sessions Judge, Faisalabad is directed to submit a report to this Court as to when the trial is likely to commence. The report should reach this Court within one week. M.B.A./ G‑35/L Petition dismissed.