1999 PLP 2371 (YLR)
AMIR MUHAMMAD alias MIRO — Petitioner Versus SHAH MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1999 PLP 2371 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J |
| Parties | AMIR MUHAMMAD alias MIRO — Petitioner Versus SHAH MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 2371 (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 1999 PLP 2371 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 2371 (YLR) (AMIR MUHAMMAD alias MIRO — Petitioner Versus SHAH MUHAMMAD and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khalid Badshah for Petitioner
- Date of hearing: 12th July, 1999.
- 2. Mr. Khalid Badshah, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after his arrest the petitioner was granted bail by the Senior Civil Judge/City Magistrate, Mardan, namely, Zafar Iqbal (his name has not been given in the order); that respondent No. l thereafter went to the Sessions Court for getting the bail cancelled and the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Mardan (Mr. Shahid Naseem Khan) by his order recorded on 13-4-1999 cancelled the bail and sent the petitioner to Jail, mainly on two grounds:--
- 5. On the other hand, Kh. Azhar Rashid, learned Assistant Advocate-General, for respondent NV.2/State, submits that since the petitioner has facilitated the main accused for committing the crime, therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S.337-A(iii)
Only allegation against accused was that he had facilitates his co-accused in stabbing the complainant- Case of accused, prima facie, was one o further inquiry in the circumstances and he was entitled to be enlarged on bail
Accuse was admitted to bail accordingly. Basharat Hussain v. Ghulam Hussain and others 1978 SCMR 357 and Mehmood Akhtar and others v. Haji Nazir Ahmad 4 and others 1995 SCMR 310 rel. Kh. Azhar Rashid, A. A.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Secondly, that the petitioner has misused the concession of bail.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Additional Sessions Judge has not applied his mind to the facts of the case and had cancelled the bail without any rhyme or reason. He further submits that the Additional Sessions Judge has not taken into account the case-law cited before him, which is to the following effect:-- (a) 1978 Supreme Court Monthly Review 357, Basharat Hussain v. Ghulam Hussain etc.: "It is quite clear from the F.I.R. that respondent No. l was alleged to have held the deceased when his son Abdul Qayyum hit the deceased on the head. Respondent No. l is, therefore, charged with facilitating the murder of the deceased. It has been rightly pointed out by the High Court that this question requires further enquiry and the petitioner was entitled to bail. " (b) 1995 Supreme Court Monthly Review 310, Mehmood Akhtar and others: v. Haji Nazir Ahmad and 4 others (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/148 & 149
Bail-- Accused was alleged to have caught hold of deceased before he was Oven injuries by his co-accused
Matter with regard to the accused being that of further enquiry. Supreme Court converted the petition into appeal and accused was granted bail. "
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, alleges that the petitioner was rightly granted bail by the Senior, Civil Judge and that the Additional Sessions Judge has committed an error in recalling the same; that the order of the Additional Sessions Judge deserves to be set at naught and the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail in the circumstances.
5. On the other hand, Kh. Azhar Rashid, learned Assistant Advocate-General, for respondent NV.2/State, submits that since the petitioner has facilitated the main accused for committing the crime, therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
6. I have gone through the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the bar, with the able assistance of both the counsel for the parties, and am of the view that the case of the petitioner prima facie is that of further enquiry in the circumstances and that he is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
7. This petition for bail is accordingly accepted.
8. The petitioner shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case, provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs.one lac only) with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar/Deputy Registrar of this Court.
9. The Additional Registrar/Deputy Registrar shall see that the sureties are respectable persons, are men of means having sufficient property in their names and hail from the settled areas of District Mardan. Attested copies of their property documents/identity cards shall be obtained and placed on file for record. N.H.Q./393/P Bail granted.