2009 PLP 1308 (YLR)
KAMRAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 1308 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Amir Hani Muslim, J |
| Parties | KAMRAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 1308 (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 2009 PLP 1308 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Amir Hani Muslim, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 1308 (YLR) (KAMRAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 420/468/471/419/34
Previous litigation existed between the parties
Challan had already been submitted and no prejudice would be caused to the Investigating Agency in case bail was granted to accused
State Counsel had no objection if bail was granted to accused
Interim bail already granted to accused was confirmed, in circumstances. Kumail Ahmed Shirazee and Muhammad Idrees Qureshi for Applicant. Sardaruddin Qureshi, State Counsel. Chaudhry Iftikhar Ahmed for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
AMIR HANI MUSLIM, J.
I have gone through the order passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South who after adjourning the matter was cancelled the bail, inter alia, on the ground that the applicant was not obliged to approach the complainant for pacifying the dispute. This is a strange ground for cancellation of bail. It is expected that the Court should encourage the parties to sink their differences. On the contrary an adverse order has been passed when an attempt to reconcile the matter was made. In any event, there appears to be previous litigation between the parties and one of the accused, brother of the applicant namely Imran has filed F.I.R. No.159 of 2005 against Alif Khan Afridi who happens to be husband of the complainant in the present F.I.R. The challan has already been submitted and no prejudice would be caused to the Investigating Agency in case of grant of bail. Learned State counsel has no objection. I, therefore, confirm the bail to the applicant on the same terms contained in the order, dated 7-12-2006. The applicant shall appear before the trial Court. This bail application stands disposed of in the above terms. H.B.T./K-7/K Bail confirmed.