2008 PLP 1060 (MLD)
MUSHTAQ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 1060 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUSHTAQ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1060 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 1060 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1060 (MLD) (MUSHTAQ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Sajid Ali Bukhari for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.489-F
Accused was behind the bars since long and no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in jail for an indefinite period
Challan had been submitted in the court, but no progress had been made
Offence with which accused was charged entailed punishment of three years, which did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Case of accused fell within the ambit of further inquiry
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.
The petitioner, seeks post-arrest bail, in a case F.I.R., No. 427 of 2007, dated 25-11-2007, offence under section 489-F, P.P.C., registered at Police Station, Ghakhar Mandi, District Gujranwala, for the allegation that the petitioner issued one cheque to the complainant, which was dishonoured, when the same was presented for encashment, hence, this case.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel, that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant with mala fide intention; and that the offence does not fall within the prohibition as contained in section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and is no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
4. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in jail for an indefinite period. Challan has been submitted in the Court but no progress has been made. The offence with which the petitioner is charged entails punishment for three years, which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The case of the petitioner falls within the ambit of further inquiry.
5. For the foregoing reasons, this bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-127/L Bail granted.