2008 P Cr (PLP)
EHSAN ELAHI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | EHSAN ELAHI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 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 2008 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 2008 P Cr (PLP) (EHSAN ELAHI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Zulfiqar Ali for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.395
Accused was not named in the F.I.R. among the other culprits who were named therein
Delay of 24 hours in lodging F.I.R. and no identification parade was held in the case
Co-accused from whom car and mobile were recovered, had already been allowed bail by the High Court, whereas accused was in jail for the last about 13 months-Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
M.A. ZAFAR, J.
Ehsan Elahi/petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.35 of 2007 dated 24-1-2007 registered with Police Station Garden Town, Lahore, under section 395, P.P.C. at the instance of Barrister Khurram Raza/complainant:
2. As per contents of F.I.R, the complainant went to meet his friend and parked the car outside the house whereas the driver was sitting in the car. The complainant and his friend heard the hue and cry; they immediately came out and saw that five persons are trying to snatch the keys of the car from his driver. One accused called the names of other co-accused, as Yasin and Sajid Shah. The accused on the call of other co-accused fired at the driver, overpowered him, threw him out of the car and forcibly snatched his mobile and took away the car also.
3. In support of this petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R, no identification parade has been conducted by the police, no supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded and the petitioner has been involved mala fide by the police to show its efficiency as the petitioner was also arrested in another F.I.R. No.55 of 2007 and the joint recovery of car and mobile has been planted by the petitioner.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General has opposed the grant of bail and submits that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence, and thus he is not entitled to grant of bail.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that Yasin, Sajid Shah and Ashraf have been named as accused in the F.I.R, but the present petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., amongst the culprits. There is delay of 24 hours in lodging the F.I.R. and no identification parade was held in this case. Co-accused Muhammad Naveed, from whom car and mobile were recovered, had already been allow d bail by this Court vide order dated 28-1-2008 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.7946-B of 2007, whereas petitioner is in jail for the last a out 13 months.
6. For what has been said above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bails bounds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Area Magistrate. H.B.T./E-4/L Bail allowed.