2008 SCMR 1621 (PLP)
UMAR HAYAT — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 SCMR 1621 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Abdul Hameed Dogar, C. J. Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan and Ch. Ejaz Yousaf, JJ |
| Parties | UMAR HAYAT — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 SCMR 1621 (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 2008 SCMR 1621 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Abdul Hameed Dogar, C. J. Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan and Ch. Ejaz Yousaf, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 SCMR 1621 (PLP) (UMAR HAYAT — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent No.2.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment, dated 30-4-2008 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.24/CB of 2008).
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.324
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Accused had allegedly fired 4/5 shots from his pistol on complainant, out of them one fire hit on his left knee
Said injury fell within the ambit of S.337-F(v), P.P.C.
Accused had rightly been granted bail by Trial Court and High Court while cancelling the same had failed to observe whether bail granting order was arbitrary, capricious or fanciful
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed and accused was granted bail in circumstances. Ch. Munir Sadiq, D.P.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
This petition is directed against order dated 30-4-2008, passed by learned Judge in Chambers of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan whereby, Criminal Miscellaneous No.24/CB of 2008 filed by complainant was allowed and bail granted to petitioner Umar Hayat was cancelled.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioner is that he fired 4-5 shots from his pistol on complainant, out of them, one fire hit on the left knee of the complainant. The said injury comes within the ambit of section 337-F(v), P.P.C.
3. It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that said offence is punishable for five years and does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., as such, bail was rightly granted to petitioner by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mian Channu, advancing cogent and sound reasons. According to him, petitioner was arrested on 15-11-2007, but till 30-1-2008 challan was not submitted as such his detention in custody was illegal.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, Punjab supported the impugned order and admitted that challan was not put up within prescribed period before the competent Court of law.
5. We have considered the contentions raised at Bar and after having gone through the orders passed by the Courts below are of the opinion that petitioner was rightly granted bail by the learned trial Court. The learned High Court while cancelling the bail has failed to observe whether bail granting order was arbitrary, capricious or fanciful.
6. In view of the above, petition is converted into appeal and is allowed. The impugned order of the learned High Court is set aside. Appellant, namely, Umar Hayat is granted bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty, thousand only) with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. N.H.Q./U-2/SC Bail allowed.