2005 PLP 1875 (YLR)
NIAZ HUSSAIN SHAH — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1875 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, J |
| Parties | NIAZ HUSSAIN SHAH — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1875 (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 2005 PLP 1875 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Syed Zawwar Hussain Jaffery, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1875 (YLR) (NIAZ HUSSAIN SHAH — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498-A
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.409 & 34
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)
Name of accused had not been disclosed in F.I.R. and it appeared that a false and concocted case was prepared with mala fide intention in connivance with complainant party due to departmental disputes amongst officers
Delay of about six years had occurred in lodging of F.I.R. for which no plausible explanation had been furnished
No role of causing loss was attributed to the accused
Protective bail was granted to accused, in circumstances. Farid Ahmed Dayo for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
Farid Ahmed Dayo for Applicant. Office objection is overruled.
2. Granted.
3. Granted subject to all just exceptions for the time being.
4. Mr. Farid Ahmed Dayo, learned counsel for the applicant/accused has prayed that the name of applicant/accused has not been disclosed in the F.I.R. and a false and concocted case is prepared with mala fide intention in connivance with the complainant party due to departmental disputes amongst the officers and there is delay of about six years in lodging of the F.I.R. for which no plausible explanation has been furnished while recording the F.I.R. and no role of causing loss is attributed to the applicant/accused.
5. Without touching the merits and demerits of the case, protective bail is granted to the applicant accused subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court. This order of protective bail shall remain effective for a period of ten days from today and the same shall automatically be lapsed on 4-3-2004 or upon applicant/accused's surrendering himself before the trial Court, whichever is earlier. H.B.T./N-61/L Protective bail granted.