2022 PLP 452 (MLD)
HIMAT ALI — Applicant/Accused Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2022 PLP 452 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh (Sukkur Bench) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HIMAT ALI — Applicant/Accused Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2022 PLP 452 (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 2022 PLP 452 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh (Sukkur Bench) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2022 PLP 452 (MLD) (HIMAT ALI — Applicant/Accused Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.398, 401, 381-A & 411
Attempt to commit robbery or dacoity when armed with deadly weapon, belonging to gang of thieves, theft of a car or other motor vehicles, dishonestly receiving stolen property
Accused with the rest of culprits being member of wandering gang associated with intention to commit theft at the place of incident and then escaped leaving behind stolen motorcycle when they found the police party coming towards them, for that the present case was registered
Nothing was brought on record by the prosecution which would suggest that the accused was member of wandering gang associated habitually to commit theft
Identification of accused by the police personnel at night time that too under the light of police mobile was a weak piece of evidence
No independent witness was available
Offence alleged against the accused did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Grant of bail in such like cases was a rule while rejection was an exception
No exceptional ground was available, which could justify withholding the concession of bail
Judgment & Decree
IRSHAD ALI SHAH J.
It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits being member of wandering gang associated with intention to commit theft at the place of incident and then made their escape good leaving behind stolen motorcycle when they found police party of PS Jarwar led by ASI Sher Khan coming to them, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicant on having been refused post-arrest bail by learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Mirpur Mathelo, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 497, Cr.P.C.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police; there is no independent witness to the incident; no independent FIR is lodged for theft of alleged recovered motorcycle and offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. By contending so, he sought for grant of post-arrest bail to the applicant on point of further inquiry.
4. Learned D.P.G. for the State has opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that the applicant has committed the offence which is affecting the society at large.
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. Nothing has been brought on record by the prosecution which may suggest that the applicant is member of wandering gang which associates habitually to commit theft, which appears to be significant. The identity of the applicant by the police personnel at night time that too under the light of police mobile is appearing to be a weak piece of evidence. There is no independent witness to the incident. The offence alleged against the applicant even otherwise is not falling within prohibitory clause of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. The grant of bail in such like cases is rule while rejection is exception. No exceptional ground is available, which may justify withholding concession of bail to the applicant. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to grant of post-arrest bail on point of further inquiry.
7. In case of Tariq Bashir and 5 others v. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34), it has been held by Hon'ble apex Court that;- "
Ss.496 & 497
Grant of bail in bailable offence is right while in non-bailable offences the grant of bail is not a right but concession/grace
Grant of bail in offences punishable with imprisonment for less than 10 years is a rule and refusal an exception."
8. In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to furnishing surety in sum of Rs.30,000/- (Thirty thousand) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
9. The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly. SA/H-23/Sindh Bail granted.