1995 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias GAMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1995 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias GAMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias GAMAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Ghulam Hussain for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1800), S.302/34
Accused who were specifically named in the promptly lodged F.I.R. with clean role in the commission of the crime had allegedly committed the murder of the deceased in a brutal manner by firing with mausers
Findings of four different Police Officers regarding innocence of one of the accused could not entitle him' to be released on bail
Bail was refused to accused in circumstances.
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Opinion of the police about the innocence of accused does not bind the Court.
Judgment & Decree
RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J:
The petitioner Muhammad Akram alias Gaman (Criminal Miscellaneous No.47/B of 1994) and Farman Ali (Criminal Miscellaneous No.4401/B of 1993) seek their post-arrest bail in a case registered against them and another under section 302/34, P.P.C. with Police Station A-Division, Kasur, on 15-12-1992, vide F.I.R. No.506/92.
2. The allegation is that Farman Ali and Muhammad Ameen alias Meeni armed with mausers and Akram alias Gaman armed with a Klashnikov came at the spot on a motor-cycle and attacked the complainant party. Farman Ali and Akram went inside the wagon in which Sana Ullah was travelling. They fired with their mausers and as a result thereof, Sana Ullah died at the spot. Muhammad Akram while armed with Klashnikov remained outside the wagon and continued shouting and firing in the air.
3. It is contended that Farman Ali was found innocent by Nawaz, A.S.I., Tariq and Zaheer-ud-Din, Sub-Inspectors, and Muhammad Tariq Hameed Joya, D.S.P. m their separate intensive investigations. It is also maintained that no recovery of any weapon was effected from him. The bail application has been opposed by the learned State counsel by stating that they are mentioned in the F.I.R. with specific role in the commission of the crime.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at some length and perusing the record, we opine that no case for grant of bail to the petitioners has been made out by the learned counsel inasmuch as the petitioners have been specifically named in the F.I.R. with clear role in the commission of the crime. The F.I.R. was promptly lodged against the petitioners. They were armed with mausers with which they committed the murder of Sana Ullah in a brutal manner. The contention that four different Police Officers found Farman Ali innocent would not entitle him to be released on bail. It is well-settled that the opinion of the police about the innocence of accused does not bind the Court. Muhammad Akram was found guilty by the police. In such a situation, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion in allowing bail to the petitioners who are accused in a murder case with serious allegations against them. Both the petitions are, therefore, dismissed being without any substance. N.H.Q./M-1835/L Bail refused.