2010 PLP 833 (YLR)
GHULAM MUHAMMAD and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 PLP 833 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Bin Yamin, J |
| Parties | GHULAM MUHAMMAD and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code. (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 833 (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 2010 PLP 833 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Bin Yamin, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 833 (YLR) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Advocate for Applicants called absent without intimation.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.392, 397, 341 & 34
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(3)
Robbery, dacoity, wrongfully restraining any person and haraaba
Accused was arrested soon after the incident by Police along with robbed property as he was chased by the Police and complainant after incident--Name of other accused was given by the arrested accused and evidence had not been recorded so far
No case for grant of bail in the matter having been made out, their application for grant of bail, was rejected. Advocate for Applicants called absent without intimation. Naveed Ali Khokhar, A.A.-G.
Judgment & Decree
BIN YAMIN, J.
Learned State counsel submits that applicant No.1 soon after the incident was arrested by the police along with robbed property as he was chased by the police and complainant after the incident therefore, the applicant No.1 has no case even on merit for grant of bail. He further states that name of the applicant No.2 was given by the arrested accused and that evidence has not yet been recorded therefore, this accused has also no case for grant of bail in the matter. He therefore, requests for rejection of this bail application. Contentions of learned State counsel find some support from the record therefore, application for grant of bail to the applicants/accused is rejected on the ground of default as well as merits. However, learned trial Court is directed to dispose of this case within six months from the date of this order under intimation to this Court. H.B.T./G-34/K Bail refused.