2009 PLP 1439 (MLD)
TALIB HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 1439 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | TALIB HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 1439 (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 2009 PLP 1439 (MLD)?
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: 2009 PLP 1439 (MLD) (TALIB HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Khaliq Safrani for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 109, 148 & 149
Accused and his co-accused were implicated by the complainant with abetment in the murder of his brother-- Incidently, the witnesses in whose presence the conspiracy was hatched, in their statements recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. had not fully supported the prosecution case in the course of investigation
Plea of alibi extended by accused was accepted and he was declared innocent
Opinion of the police as to the innocence of accused was based on cogent material, which had to be given weight on a tentative assessment of the evidence available on the record
Case of accused was one of further inquiry as enough incriminating material was not available to connect him with the offence
Judgment & Decree
TARIQ SHAMIM, J.
Through this petition, the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case, F.I.R. No.162 of 2008, dated 15-7-2008 for offences under sections 302, 109, 148 and 149, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Ahmad Nagar, District Gujranwala.
2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the brother of the complainant was murdered, as a consequence whereof the aforementioned F.I.R. was lodged.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the only role ascribed to the petitioner and his two co-accused, namely, Khalid and Anwar is of abetting the offence; that the witnesses of abetment have not supported the prosecution case before the police; that during investigation the plea of alibi extended by the petitioner was accepted by the police and consequently, he was declared innocent and discharge report was also prepared and that the petitioner is not required by the police for any purpose, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the petition.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
6. It has been noticed that the petitioner and his co-accused namely, Khalid and Anwar were implicated by the complainant with abetment of the murder of his brother. Incidentally, the witnesses in whose presence the conspiracy was hatched in their statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. have not fully supported the prosecution case in the course of investigation. The plea of alibi extended by the petitioner was accepted and consequently, he was declared innocent. The opinion of the police as to the innocence of the petitioner is based on cogent material which, therefore, has to be given weight. On a tentative assessment of the evidence available on the record. I have come to the conclusion that the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry as there is not enough incriminating material available to connect him with the offence.
7. Consequently, this petition is ALLOWED and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./T-4/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail grante