1992 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD IBRAHEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IBRAHEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 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: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD IBRAHEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S: 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.107/354-A/342/379/506/34
Nude photographs of lady victim were not recovered from accused who was arrested on her pointation during investigation
F.I.R. did not show presence of accused at the time when the victim was made nude or her photographs were taken
Allegation against accused only was that he al. his wife (co-accused) had taken a cash of Rs.2,000 twice from the victim and that her bangles were recovered from his house
Judgment & Decree
Shaikh Ghulam Sabir Niazi for Applicant. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, AA: G. for the State. This application under section 497/498, Cr.P.C. has been presented on behalf of applicant Muhammad Ibrahim, who is facing trial for an offence under section 107/354-A/342/379/506/34, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. No.477/87 lodged at Police Station Liaquatabad, Karachi, on 15-10-1987. The prosecution case is that the wife of complainant Muhammad Bilal, Mst. Shahnaz was taken by accused Mst. Sarwari Begum to Federal Capital Area, Liaquatabad, Karachi, on pretext of giving her the amount of Committee (Bisi) and after keeping her in a flat she went out. In the meanwhile a person came over there who was followed by another person. They told Mst. Shahnaz that they were C.I.A. 555 persons. They made her nude and took her photographs in that condition. The ornaments of Mst. Shahnaz comprising four gold bangles, locket and a pair of ear-rings were also snatched away. In the meanwhile accused Mst. Sarwari Begum came back smiling and asked her to pay them Rs.2,
000. Immediately thereafter Muhammad Ibrahim, the husband of Mst. Sarwari Begum also came there and asked whether the mission had been completed or not. Thereupon the accused Mst. Sarwari Begum replied that Mst. Shahnaz had no money. Thereafter accused Mst. Sarwari Begum and her husband Muhammad Ibrahim brought Mst. Shahnaz to her house and took away Rs.2,
000. Next day they came over there and took away another sum of Rs.2,000 from Mst. Shahnaz. The report of this incident was lodged on 15-10-1987 i.e. five days after the incident. Bail application was presented on behalf of the applicant before the learned trial Court who by his impugned order rejected the same on the ground that police had applied 354-A, P.P.C. which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, learned AA.-G. It is an admitted fact that nude photographs have not been recovered from the possession of the accused. He was arrested on the pointation of Mst. Shahnaz Begum during investigation. There is nothing in the F.I.R. that the accused was present at the time when Mst. Shahnaz was made nude or her photographs were taken. The only offence alleged to have been committed by this accused is that he alongwith his wife Mst. Sarwari Begum, co-accused had taken a cash of Rs.2,000 twice from Y A the victim Mst. Shahnaz and that bangles of the victim were recovered from his house. I would, therefore admit him to bail subject to his furnishing a surety in E the sum of Rs.30,000 with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./M-1523/K Bail granted.