2009 PLP 242 (MLD)
SAMIULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 242 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SAMIULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 242 (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 242 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar 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 242 (MLD) (SAMIULLAH and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Gohar Zaman Khan Kundi for Petitioners.
- 3. Mr. Gohar Zaman Kundi Advocate, learned counsel appearing for the accused/petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely roped in the case. It was also argued that no incriminating CDs or cassettes have been recovered from them. So no reasonable grounds exist to connect them with the commission of the offence and they are entitled to be released on bail.
- 4. Mr. Sanaullah Khan Shamim Gandapur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State vehemently opposed the bail concession to the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have been directly charged in the F.I.R., which was lodged with all reasonable promptitude and materials exist on the record to connect them with the commission of the offence.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.120-B/121
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7
F.I.R. showed that accused persons were indulging in inciting and preparing innocent minor girls for suicidal attacks in the name of "Jehad" in a `Dini Madrassa', wherefrom two ladies were recovered
Record had revealed that statements of the ladies had been recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C., wherein they had admitted that they were themselves interested in Jehad and on their own will they used the cassettes/CDs for Jehad without any inducement or force by accused persons
Police had failed to bring on record such materials so as to reasonably connect accused persons with the commission of offence
Prima facie, an inordinate delay took place in lodging the report and no incriminating article had been recovered from either of the two accused persons so as to disentitle them to the concession of bail
Tentative assessment of the materials brought on record, had brought case of accused persons within the ambit of "further inquiry", entitling them to the concession of bail
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.
Samiullah Khan and Saifullah Jan, accused/petitioners, charged in case F.I.R. No.135, dated 15-9-2008 of Police Station Mullazai, Tehsil and District Tank, registered under sections 120-B/121, P.P.C. and section 7 ATA, having been refused the concession of bail by the learned Judge Anti Terrorism Court D.I. Khan vide judgment, dated 8-10-2008, has filed the application in hand for the same relief.
2. According to the F.I.R lodged-by Said Nawaz Khan S.H.O. of Police Station Mullazai, the accused/petitioners were indulged in inciting and preparing innocent minor girls for suicidal attacks in the name of `Jehad' in a "Dinni Madrissa", wherefrom two ladies namely Mst. Nazmeena and Mst. Sadia Bibi were recovered during an inquiry under section 156(3), Cr.P.C.
3. Mr. Gohar Zaman Kundi Advocate, learned counsel appearing for the accused/petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely roped in the case. It was also argued that no incriminating CDs or cassettes have been recovered from them. So no reasonable grounds exist to connect them with the commission of the offence and they are entitled to be released on bail.
4. Mr. Sanaullah Khan Shamim Gandapur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State vehemently opposed the bail concession to the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have been directly charged in the F.I.R., which was lodged with all reasonable promptitude and materials exist on the record to connect them with the commission of the offence.
5. I have gone through the entire record of the case and minutely considered the arguments advanced at the bar.
6. Perusal of the available record reveals that the statements of the ladies have been recorded under section 164, Cr. P. C. wherein they have admitted that they were themselves interested in Jehad and on their own will they used the cassettes/CDs for Jehad and have gone to the house of Khalifa on their own sweet-will, without any inducement, or force by the petitioners.
7. Perusal of the record further reveals that so far the police had failed to bring on record such materials so as to reasonably connect the accused/petitioners with the commission of the offence. Prima facie, there is an inordinate delay in lodging the report and no incriminating article has been recovered from either of the two accused/petitioners so as to disentitle them to the concession of bail. Tentative assessment of the materials so far brought on record brings their case within the ambit of further inquiry, entitling them to the concession of bail.
8. Resultantly, this application is allowed and the accused/ petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. three lacs with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Ilaqa/Judicial Magistrate, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. Above are reasons for my short order of even date. H.B.T./202/P Bail granted.