2006 PLP 1828 (YLR)
Mehr MUHAMMAD YOUNIS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1828 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | M. Bilal Khan, J |
| Parties | Mehr MUHAMMAD YOUNIS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1828 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1828 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: M. Bilal Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1828 (YLR) (Mehr MUHAMMAD YOUNIS — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Hassan Qadir Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.498-F
Accused who was allowed bail in a case, when came out of Court room was apprehended by police officer
Inquiry had revealed that said subsequent arrest was being sought in a different case registered against him which was subject-matter of present bail application and not in the case in which he had been allowed ad interim pre-arrest bail, whereupon accused was handed over to police
Contention of accused that once bail application had been filed in the office, police could not effect arrest of accused had no substance
Accused had already been formally arrested when present petition came up before the Court for hearing
Bail petition for pre-arrest bail thus having become infructuous, was dismissed. Shoaib Zafar for the Complainant. Riaz Ali Inspector/Ineharge Investigation and Abdul Ghafoor S.-I., P.S. Shalimar, Lahore with police papers.
Judgment & Decree
M. BILAL KHAN, J.
The petitioner who is in custody has been produced by Riaz Ali Inpector/Incharge Investigation Police ' Station Shalimar, Lahore.
2. This is an application for pre-arrest bail and Syed Hassan Qadir Shah, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in case F.I.R. No.412 of 2005 registered at Police Station Shalimar, Lahore, under section 489-F, P.P.C. the petitioner had been allowed ad interim pre-arrest bail by my learned brother Mian M. Najum-uz-Zaman, J. this morning. He added that the petitioner's instant bail application had also been filed in the office today and a prayer had been made for fixation of the same today; after having been allowed bail by my said learned brother, the petitioner came out of the Court room and was apprehended by a person in plain clothes who claimed to be an Assistant Sub-Inspector of police; on this, the Security Officer of this Court was informed who made necessary enquiries and found out that the person who ' had apprehended the petitioner was Siraj Din A.S.-I. from Police Station Shalimar.
3. The Security Officer present in the Court informs that he had brought the matter to the notice of my learned brother Mian M. Najum-uz-Zaman, J. who had asked the former to enquire if the petitioner had been apprehended in case F.I.R. No.412 of 2005 or in some other case. The Inquiry revealed that his arrest was being sought in case F.I.R. No.383 of 2005, registered at Police Station Shalimar, under section 489-F, P.P.C. which is the subject-matter of the instant bail application and not in the case in which he had been allowed ad interim pre-arrest bail, whereupon the petitioner was handed over to the police. His formal arrest has been shown vide Rappat No.19 dated 27-10-2005. There is no substance in the contention of the A learned counsel for the petitioner that once bail application has been filed in the office, the police cannot effect arrest of a person. The petitioner had already been formally arrested when this petition came up before this Court for hearing at 2-00 p.m. Therefore, this petition for pre-arrest bail having become infructuous is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./M-1383/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.