PCRLJ 1997

1997 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD AYOUB and~3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
1997-April-22
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1997 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUHAMMAD AYOUB and~3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 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: 1997 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AYOUB and~3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Admittedly, the applicants are stated to have been apprehended after their arrest in another case and their names are also stated to have been disclosed by one of the co-accused, namely, Barkat Ali. Learned Additional Advocate -General concedes that no identification test of the applicants was held by the prosecution after the former's arrest by the police. None of the accused has been named in the F. I. R.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.436/336/109/120-B

Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(3)-- Bail, grant of

Accused were not named in the F. I. R.

Accused had been apprehended after their arrest in another case and their names had been disclosed by a co-accused

No identification test of the accused was held by the prosecution after their arrest by the police

Case against accused in circumstances required further inquiry and they were, admitted to bail accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.436/336/109/120-B

Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(3)-- Bail, grant of

Accused were not named in the F. I. R.

Accused had been apprehended after their arrest in another case and their names had been disclosed by a co-accused

No identification test of the accused was held by the prosecution after their arrest by the police

Case against accused in circumstances required further inquiry and they were, admitted to bail accordingly. Sardar Muhammad Ishaq Khan for Applicants. Muhammad Saleem, A.A.-G. According to the allegations, on 3-5-1994 the applicants are said to have attacked the Chowkidar of Saving Centre, which is located in Sector 5-6, New Karachi, and set its office on fire. They are also stated to have taken away a .12 bore gun. All the accused are stated to have been armed with fire-arms. Admittedly, the applicants are stated to have been apprehended after their arrest in another case and their names are also stated to have been disclosed by one of the co-accused, namely, Barkat Ali. Learned Additional Advocate -General concedes that no identification test of the applicants was held by the prosecution after the former's arrest by the police. None of the accused has been named in the F. I. R. Consequently, the contention of the learned counsel for the applicants that the case requires further inquiry, does not appear to be untenable. Each of the applicants is, therefore, granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q./M-173/K Bail allowed.