Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Trusted direct lawyer access
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.

☎ Phone and WhatsApp access ⚖ Verified lawyer directory 🔒 Secure payment
⚡ Connect with 10 Lawyers for Rs 1,000
Pay once. Open contact numbers for lawyers matching your legal need.

FERZAND ALI versus MUNIR AHMAD


Criminal Code of Conduct (CR PC) Sections 497 (5) of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 and 307/149/148, cause the defendant to suffer no injury and only minor injury to the witnesses. Is responsible for delivering. Further investigations are ordered under the order of the session judge's proceedings; therefore, no interference is sought in the circumstances.

1987 P Cr. L J 1168 (2)

[Lahore]

Before Ijaz Nisar, J

FARZAND ALI‑-‑Petitioner

versus

MUNIR AHMAD and 5 others‑‑Respondents

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 212/B of 1987, decided on 2nd March, 1987.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 307/149/148‑‑Bail, cancellation of‑‑Accused not causing any injury to deceased and responsible only for causing simple injuries to witnesses‑‑Case found to be of further inquiry‑‑Order of Sessions Judge proceeding o grounds, therefore, did not call for interference in circumstances.

Ch. Muhammad Yusuf for Petitioner.

Ch. Ghulam Sarwar for Respondents.

Faizur Rahman for the State.

ORDER

This is an application for the cancellation of bail of Munir Ahmad and Muhammad Husain respondents allowed to them by the learned Sessions Judge, Kasur, on 5‑1‑1987.

The prosecution case is that over some money dispute the respondents accompanied by 8 others, attacked the complainant party with fire‑arms, hatchet and sticks resulting in the death of Rashid Ahmad deceased and injuries to Ghulam Muhammad, Fazal Din, Ghulam Rasul, Muhammad Rafrq and Muhammad Anwar P.Ws. on 2‑8‑1986.

2. The cancellation is sought on the ground that the respondents had also acted in pre‑concert with the other co‑accused and had taken active part in the occurrence by causing injuries to Muhammad Anwar and Fazal Din P.Ws. and as such, were not entitled to be released on bail. It is further stated that they are threatening the prosecution witnesses.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has resisted the application. According to him, the respondents had been falsely roped in and they did not cause any injuries to the deceased and are attributed one simple injury each to Muhammad Anwar and Fazal Din P.Ws. It is also stated that the allegation of tampering with the prosecution evidence is of vague and general nature.

4. I have perused the order of the learned Sessions Judge. He has admitted the respondents to bail on the ground that their case required further inquiry. This order proceeds on sound grounds and does not call for any interference. The fact that the respondents did not cause any injuries to the deceased and confined them to causing simple injuries to the P.Ws., makes out a case for further inquiry. They were, therefore, rightly admitted to bail. Accordingly the petition is dismissed.

S.A./F‑12/L Bail cancellation refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
Pakistan, top advocate family court from Kotla Jam lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.