2005 P Cr (PLP)
KHATOOR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KHATOOR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 P Cr (PLP)?
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 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: 2005 P Cr (PLP) (KHATOOR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- In this background, the learned Advocate for the applicant has stated that the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused Ghulam Fareed who has been granted bail by this Court, therefore, on the rule of consistency the applicant is also entitled to the concession of bail. The learned Advocate for the State conceded the above position and has no objection to the grant of bail.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.9
Co-accused had been granted bail and case of accused was similar to that of co-accused who had been granted bail
Accused, in circumstances was also entitled to concession of bail on the rule of consistency.
Judgment & Decree
1. Deferred. 2 and
3. Granted.
4. On 2-8-2002 the complainant went to Police Station, Bahu Khoso and lodged F.I.R. bearing Crime No.34 of 2000 alleging therein that about one year prior to lodging the F.I.R. at 10-00 a.m. the applicant along with two accused persons namely Fareed and Balochan armed with kalashnikovs snatched the cattle from his possession. The co-accused Ghulam Fareed filed bail application before this Court which was granted on 1-3-2002. In this background, the learned Advocate for the applicant has stated that the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused Ghulam Fareed who has been granted bail by this Court, therefore, on the rule of consistency the applicant is also entitled to the concession of bail. The learned Advocate for the State conceded the above position and has no objection to the grant of bail. The record supports the above contention. On perusal of the record it reveals that the case of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused Ghulam Fareed who has been granted bail by this Court therefore, the applicant is also entitled to the concession of bail on the rule of consistency. Consequently, bail is granted to the applicant in the sum of Rs.one lac on furnishing solvent surety with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. The application is allowed. H.B.T./K-45/K Bail granted.