2005 PLP 1055 (YLR)
SALEEM AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1055 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | SALEEM AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1055 (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 1055 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1055 (YLR) (SALEEM AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nadir Manzoor Dogar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 379/411
Accused had alleged that some dispute existed between the parties with regard to a tractor which was purchased by his grand father from the complainant
Suit had also been filed by grand father of accused which was patched up and complainant agreed to give his allegedly stolen rotavator as well as some cash to him for return of Tractor
Tractor was delivered back to complainant who himself handed over disputed rotavator to grand father of accused and when he raised demand of remaining amount, present false case was got registered as a counter blast
Contentions raised by accused with regard to civil suit and agreement between parties found support from documents placed on record
Copy of plaint of said earlier suit also had established that parties had a dispute over same Tractor
Copy of agreement had also been produced
Registration of case against accused with said background could be a result of mala fides on the part of complainant to avoid payment of remaining amount to his grand father in lieu of Tractor
Even otherwise, recovery of alleged stolen rotavator had been effected
Sending accused to lock-up would not serve any better purpose to prosecution
Accused having succeeded in making out a case entitling him to pre-arrest bail, interim bail already granted to him was confirmed. Sh. Arshad Ali for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner seeks bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No.179 dated 10-9-2004 under sections 379/411, P.P.C., Police, Station, Thingi, District Vehari.
2. Briefly the prosecution story is that on the fateful day, the rotavator of the complainant worth Rs.70,000 was stolen from his Dera. The complainant along with Muhammad Iqbal went in search and when they reached the Dera of the petitioner, with some hesitation it was told by Saleem Akram petitioner he and Saleem had committed the theft and thereafter, had put the rotavator with one Abdul Sattar. The petitioner is further alleged to have got recovered the rotavator from the said Dera.
3. Learned counsel contends that in fact there was some dispute between the parties with regard to a Tractor which was purchased by petitioner's grand-father from the complainant. A civil suit had also been filed by petitioner's grand-father which however, was patched up and complainant agreed to give his rotatvator as well as some cash to him for return of the Tractor. According to the learned counsel the tractor was delivered back to the complainant who himself handed over the said rotavator to the petitioner's grand-father and when he raised demand of the remaining amount the instant false case was got registered as a counter blast.
4. Bail opposed by the learned State counsel.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner find support from documents placed on record. The copy of plaint of the earlier suit also establishes the fact that parties had a dispute over some tractor. In this regard a copy of the agreement has also been produced. With this back ground, registration of instant case against the petitioner can be result of mala fides on the part of the complainant to avoid payment of the remaining amount to his grand-father in lieu of tractor. Even otherwise, recovery of alleged stolen rotavator has been effected and sending the petitioner to lock up would not serve any better purpose to the prosecution.
7. For what has been discussed above, the petitioner has succeeded in making out a case entitling him to pre-arrest bail. Therefore, the interim bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court on 13-10-2004 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial/Ilaqa Magistrate. H.B.T./S-306/L Bail granted.