1989 P Cr (PLP)
MUSTAFA‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J |
| Parties | MUSTAFA‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (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 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (MUSTAFA‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Customs Act (IV of 1969), S.156(l)(8)(89)‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Allegations made in F.I.R. supported by Mashirnama and statements of recovery Mashirs, establishing accused's prima facie involvement in attempt to smuggle considerable quantity of Charas‑‑Bail application rejected. Akmal Wasim for Applicant. Niaz Ahmed Khan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Special Criminal Bail Application No. 82 of 1988, decided on 8th August, 1988. ‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Customs Act (IV of 1969), S.156(l)(8)(89)‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Allegations made in F.I.R. supported by Mashirnama and statements of recovery Mashirs, establishing accused's prima facie involvement in attempt to smuggle considerable quantity of Charas‑‑Bail application rejected. Akmal Wasim for Applicant. Niaz Ahmed Khan for the State. Accused Mustafa, who is challaned in a case under section 156(1)(8)(89) of the Customs Act, 1969 alongwith five others has applied for bail. The allegation against the present applicant in the F.I.R. is that he attempted to export plywood to Saudi Arabia in which a quantity of 600 Kg. Charas was concealed. According to the allegations in the F.I.R. after service of notice under section 171 of the Customs Act the accused Mustafa allegedly opened the Godown where the goods meant for export to Saudi Arabia were stored and from there the aforesaid quantity 600 Kg. Charas was recovered. The allegations in the F.I.R. prima facie show involvement of applicant Mustafa in the attempt to smuggle Charas weighing 600 Kg. to Saudi Arabia. Learned counsel for the applicant, however, contends that his client is entitled to be enlarged on bail, as the other accused Abdul Khaliq who is shown in the challan as the principal accused has been enlarged on bail today in Special Criminal Bail No. 85 of 1988. The allegations against the other accused Abdul Khaliq are quite distinguishable from the allegations which are made against the present applicant in the F.I.R. In fact in the F.I.R. nothing is stated to have been recovered from accused Abdul Khaliq: The facts alleged against the accused Abdul Khaliq are stated in detail in the above referred Special Criminal Bail application which has been disposed of by a separate order. In so far the present applicant is concerned I have already pointed out that his involvement prima facie is established by the allegations made in the F.I.R. which is also supported by the Mashirnama and the statements of recovery Mashirs. No case for grant of bail at this stage is made out by the present applicant. The application is accordingly rejected. H B.T./M‑649/K Application rejected.