1987 PLP 3181 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD SARDAR and another — Petitioners. Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 3181 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SARDAR and another — Petitioners. Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 3181 (MLD)?
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 PLP 3181 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 3181 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD SARDAR and another — Petitioners. Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Naveed Shaharyar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/307 & 109/34--Bail, grant of--Accused ascribed ineffective firing on complainant--No injury caused to deceased--Accused not repeating fire--Parties admittedly inimical to each other--Criminal litigation pending between them- Sharing of common intention with their co-accused being matter of further inquiry, bail granted. C. M. Latif for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/307 & 109/34--Bail, grant of--Accused ascribed ineffective firing on complainant--No injury caused to deceased--Accused not repeating fire--Parties admittedly inimical to each other--Criminal litigation pending between them- Sharing of common intention with their co-accused being matter of further inquiry, bail granted. Sh. Naveed Shaharyar for Petitioner. C. M. Latif for the State. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 6-6-1987 at about 8 a.m Khizar Hayat complainant alongwith his son Shaukat Hayat, Farzand Hussain and Muhammad Sabir was proceeding to his lands. When they reached near play-ground of Islamia High School, all of a sudden Muhammad Sardar armed with rifle, Muhammad Fayyaz armed with gun and Dildar armed with carbine came out of an ambush from behind the school wall. Sardar challenged. Thereafter, both Fayyaz and Sardar accused-petitioners fired one shot each at the complainant who was not hit. Dildar accused fired hitting Shaukat Hayat deceased who fell down dead. The occurrence was witnessed by the companions of the complainant. The accused left the spot. The motive was stated to be a case under section 307, P.P.C against Shaukat Hayat deceased and his father Khizar Hayat complainant which was pending at that time. It was alleged in F.I.R. that the three accused murdered Shaukat Hayat under instigation of Khurshid Ahmad, Muhammad Akhtar, Chan Pir and Abdul Ghafoor accused. The two petitioners and their co-accused were arrested. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. It is admitted in F.I.R. that the parties were on inimical terms with each other. A case under section 307, PPC between the parties was pending at the time of present occurrence. Muhammad Sardar and Muhammad Fayyaz petitioners have been ascribed ineffective shots at Khizar Hayat complainant. They did not repeat fires at the complainant nor caused any injury to the deceased. In these circumstances, the question whether they shared common intention A with their co-accused makes out their case to be that of further enquiry. I admit Muhammad Sardar and Muhammad Fayyaz accused petitioners to bail on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum o Rs. 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Gujrat. S.A./M-428/L Bail granted.