1985 P Cr (PLP)
DIN MUHAMMAD Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1985 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | DIN MUHAMMAD Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 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 1985 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 P Cr (PLP) (DIN MUHAMMAD Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Sultan Alam for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 29th November, 1981
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.148/307/326/447/448/459/492/149‑‑Further inquiry‑‑Accused attributed single grievous injury on non‑vital part of body‑‑At one stage accused having, been declared innocent by Investigating Officer‑‑Divergent versions present on police record‑‑Case, held, was sufficient to put Court on further inquiry‑ Accused allowed bail in circumstances. Naeem Goreja for the State.
Judgment & Decree
M. Sultan Alam for Appellant. Naeem Goreja for the State. Date of hearing: 29th November, 1981 This is an application for bail on behalf of Din Muhammad in a case under section 307/326/492/447/448/459/148/149, P.P.C. registered vide F.I.R. No.603, dated 31‑7‑1981 at Police Station Old Kotwali, Multan.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner alongwith five others in furtherance of their common object launched a murderous assault upon Ahmad Ali Khan and caused as many as eight injuries. So far as the petitioner is concerned, it is alleged that he was armed with a hatchet with which he caused an incised wound on mid side of right hand 5 c.m. x 3 c.m. x bone deep cutting the underneath muscles restricting movements of right hand and its finger and thumb. It is to be noted that after X‑Ray this injury was declared grievous.
3. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was declared innocent by the S.H.O. on 7‑8‑1981 and it was directed that his name be placed in column No.2. It is urged that the injury attributed to the petitioner is not on the vital part of the body.
4. As against this learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has seriously opposed this petition. He submits that it was the petitioner who opened the attack and caused grievous injury to the victim with deadly weapon and that he had been bound down under section 107/151, Cr.P.C. for one year. He argues that the petitioner was found guilty by the A.S.P. who directed that the challan be submitted against him.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that be that as it may the fact remains there that at one stage the petitioner was declared innocent by the Investigating Officer and that the police record itself indicates divergent versions, which is sufficient to put the Court on further inquiry. The petitioner, who is in jail since 24‑10‑1981 is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Multan. S.A Petition accepted