2007 P Cr (PLP)
DAWAR KHAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DAWAR KHAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 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 2007 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 P Cr (PLP) (DAWAR KHAN — Applicant 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.324/353/34
Accused along with two other co-accused was arrested for, assaulting police party
Neither crime empties were secured from place of occurrence nor any person from either side sustained injury in the alleged encounter
Accused was behind bars for more than one year but case had not concluded in spite of the fact that all witnesses were police personnel
Plea raised by accused was that two co-accused had been granted bail
Contention of prosecution was that instead of grant of bail, direction might be given for expeditious conclusion of trial
Imparting direction to proceed with the case expeditiously would be of no consequence as prosecution did not seem to be serious in prosecuting the case
Accused could not be allowed to rot in jail on account of lukewarm lethargic rather callous conduct displayed by police
Bail to accused was declined by Trial Court without taking note of previous bail order, and/or distinguishing role of accused
Ground of grant of bail to co-accused conspicuously appeared to have been taken by the accused in his application for bail
Refusal of bail to accused was violative of the rule of consistency and militated against the norms of smooth and even-handed dispensation of justice
Bail was granted in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J.
The applicant is seeking bail in crime bearing F.I.R. No.286 of 2005 Police Station North Nazimabad Karachi registered under sections 353/324/34, P.P.C. on 18-8-2005 by Sub-Inspector Liaqat Ali Arif on behalf of State alleging therein that the applicant along with two other co-accused assaulted the police party with intent to deter them from discharging their duties and intentionally attempted to cause Qatl-e-Amd. Bail is pressed on the ground that neither any empty was recovered from place of Wardat nor any one from either side was injured. It is urged that the co-accused was granted bail by the lower Court, and that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Learned State counsel has opposed the grant of bail contending that the accused were arrested on the spot. She suggests that direction be given to the trial Court to proceed with the case expeditiously though she has not disputed grant of bail to co-accused. The contentions put forward have been considered and material placed on record has been perused. Admittedly neither crime-empties were secured from the place of Wardat nor any person from either side sustained injury in the alleged encounter. The applicant is behind bars since more than past one year but the case has not concluded in spite of the fact that all the witnesses are police personnel. In this view of the matter, imparting direction to proceed with the case expeditiously will be of no consequence as the prosecution does not seem to be serious in prosecuting the case. The applicant cannot be allowed to rot in jail on account of lukewarm, lethargic rather callous conduct displayed by the police. In the circumstances, the applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum, of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Before parting with the order it is deemed appropriate to note that certified true copy of bail order, dated 15-4-2006, placed on record shows that co-accused Rahim Saeed was granted bail by Ms. Akhtar Sultana Vth Assistant Sessions Judge, Karachi, while subsequently, the bail was declined to the applicant by Ms. Zahida Sikandar Assistant Sessions Judge, Karachi Central without taking note of the previous bail order, and/or distinguishing the role of the applicant, though the ground of grant of bail to co-accused conspicuously appears to have been taken B in his application for bail. Obviously enough the refusal of bail to the applicant, was violative of the rule of consistency and militated against the norms of smooth and even-handed dispensation of justice. Indeed such indifferent and imprudent conduct demonstrated by Judicial Officers contributes in increasing the workload on this Court, apart from causing. uncalled for hardship to the accused persons. Learned M.I.T. shall look into this and prepare a self-contained note for consideration of Honourable Chief Justice. M.H./D-44/K?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.