2006 PLP 2461 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2461 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHRAF — 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 2461 (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 2461 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2461 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ASHRAF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Afzal Farooka for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.406
Pre-arrest bail, refusal of--Investigation qua accused was incomplete as the recover' was yet to be effected from accused
Petitioner/accused had failed to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of complainant or the police
Principles governing grant of pre-arrest bail were that accused had to show that case had cropped up due to political wire pulling; the arrest was tainted with mala fide and ulterior motives such as humiliation and unjustified harassment at the hands of police with intention to cause irreparable injury to the reputation and liberty of a person
Such grounds were lacking in the petition which was dismissed. Qamar-uz-Zaman Qureshi for the Complainant. Sohail Tahir for the State along with Muhammad Younas, A.S.-I., with Record.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.
Muhammad Ashraf, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.120 dated 20-4-2005 registered under section 406, P.P.C. with Police Station, Urban Area, Sargodha on the ground that he has falsely been implicated in the instant case; and that similar relief has been refused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha vide his order dated 21-5-2005.
2. Conversely, learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for confirmation of bail and submitted that recovery of ornaments weighing 10 tolas, sale-deed of the house of the complainant and other articles are yet to be effected from the petitioner.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The investigation qua him is incomplete as the recovery is yet to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner has failed to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or the police. The principles governing the grant of pre-arrest bail are that the petitioner accused has to show that the case was cropped up due to political wire pulling, the arrest being tainted with mala fide and ulterior motives such as humiliation and unjustified harassment at the hands of the police with intention to cause irreparable injury to the reputation and liberty of a person, which is lacking in this petition.
5. For what has been discussed above, this is meritless and is dismissed. H.B.T./M-290/L????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail refused.