2014 PLP 2025 (YLR)
AAMIR SAMI — Applicant Versus Mst. RUBY and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2014 PLP 2025 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J |
| Parties | AAMIR SAMI — Applicant Versus Mst. RUBY and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 2025 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 PLP 2025 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 2025 (YLR) (AAMIR SAMI — Applicant Versus Mst. RUBY and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Babar Ali Shaikh for Respondent No.1.
- I have heard the parties advocates at considerable length and have gone through the impugned orders. As the respondent No.1 namely Mst. Ruby daughter of Saeed Ahmed was granted bail by the learned trial Court on merit and after considering all the material available before him.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(5)
Provisions of S. 497(5), Cr.P.C were not punitive in nature and there was no compulsion for cancelling bail, unless bail granting order was patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and had resulted in miscarriage of justice, or where accused was found to be making efforts to misuse concession of bail by extending threats or tampering with the prosecution case.
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 448, 457, 380 & 34
House-trespass, lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment, theft in dwelling house, common intention
Scope
Nothing on record suggested that accused had either misused the concession of bail or made an attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence
Accused was granted bail after proper appreciation of evidence on record
No illegality was pointed out in the bail granting order
Application for cancellation of bail was dismissed accordingly. Muhammad Arif for Applicant. Shahzad Saleem, A.P.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL MAALIK GADDI, J.
Through this application under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. read with section 561-A, Cr.P.C., the applicant has challenged the orders dated 20-11-2012 and 21-1-2013 passed by the learned IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karachi Est, whereby the learned Judge after hearing the parties admitted the respondent No.l on bail in Crime No.646 of 2012 registered under section 448/380/457/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Ferozabad, Karachi East. I have heard the parties advocates at considerable length and have gone through the impugned orders. As the respondent No.1 namely Mst. Ruby daughter of Saeed Ahmed was granted bail by the learned trial Court on merit and after considering all the material available before him. Provisions of section 497(5), Cr.P.C. are not punitive in nature and there is no compulsion for cancelling bail, unless bail granting order is patently illegal, erroneous, factual incorrect and has resulted in miscarriage of justice or where accused were found to be making efforts to misuse concession of bail by extending threats or tampering with prosecution case. Nothing on record to suggest that the applicant either misuse the concession of bail or she has made an attempt to tamper the prosecution evidence. On the contrary it reveals that the applicant has been granted bail after proper appreciation of evidence on record. Learned counsel for the applicant though has prayed for cancellation of bail but he was not in a position even to point out any of the illegality in the order passed by the learned trial Court while passing bail order. Learned A.P.-G. has also not supported the application in hand. No case is made out for cancellation of bail, I, accordingly under the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case dismissed this Criminal Miscellaneous Application. MWA/A-25/Sindh Application dismissed.