2009 PLP 745 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD ASGHAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 745 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASGHAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 745 (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 745 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore 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 745 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD ASGHAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tariq Mehmood Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.411/458/380
Co-accused, who was female had been granted bail
Trial Magistrate in his order had recorded observation that ingredients of S.458, P.P.C. did not exist in the case, whereas the sentence involved under S.380, P.P.C. was short of 10 years or imprisonment for life
Accused was behind the bars from 16-9-2008
Person of accused, was not required for investigation
If accused was allowed bail and ultimately strong evidence would become available on the record at the stage of trial, remedy was that he could be convicted and sentenced; and if ultimately he was acquitted of the charge, then, his detention and loss occasioned, could not be compensated by any scale
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL SATTAR GORAYA, J.
Through this application, the petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 467 of 2008, dated 30-8-2008, registered under sections 411/458/380, P.P.C. at Police Station Pacca Larran, District Rahim Yar Khan.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in facts and circumstances of the case as disclosed in F.I.R., section 458 is not attracted as the ingredients of the above section are missing. In the offence under section 380, P.P.C., sentence involved is as 7 years:
3. The learned DPG has seriously opposed the bail application that offence with which one petitioner has been charged falls within the prohibition contained in subsection 1 of section 497, Cr.P.C. Further argued that recovery has been effected from the petitioner and there is a sufficient evidence available on the record to connect the petitioner with the commission of the offence.
4. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record minutely.
5. Co-accused of the petitioner Mst. Hameeda Bibi filed an application for grant of post arrest bail which has since been allowed by the learned trial Magistrate vide order, dated 20-9-2008. The case of co-accused Mst. Hameeda Bibi is covered under proviso to section 497, CR.P.C. therefore, her case stands on different pedestal. However, vide paragraph No.6 of the order of the learned Trial Magistrate he recorded observation that the ingredients of section 458 P.P.C. are not existing in the present case, whereas the sentence involved under section 380 is short of 10 years or imprisonment for life. The petitioner is behind the bars since 16-9-2008. Admittedly, the persons of the petitioner are not required for investigation. If the accused is allowed bail and ultimately strong evidence becomes available on the record at the stage of trial, there is a remedy that he can be convicted and sentenced and if ultimately he is acquitted of the charge, his detention and loss occasioned cannot be compensated by any scale. In this view of the matter, I am fortified in my view by Nasir Mehmood Khan v. The State (1985 PCr.LJ 159) and Hakim Ali Zardari v. The State (PLD 1988 SC 1). I have come to the inescapable conclusion that this is a fit case in which bail should be granted to the accused. Petitioner is granted post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-133/L Bail granted.