2002 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM SHABIR‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Nabi Soomro, J |
| Parties | GHULAM SHABIR‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ghulam Nabi Soomro, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM SHABIR‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 497(1)‑‑‑Offences, Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(1)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Name of accused did not appear in F.I.R.‑‑‑Only evidence against accused was his identification held after more than three weeks of incident‑‑‑Offence allegedly committed by accused prescribed minimum punishment of rigorous imprisonment for three years which did not specify any maximum sentence for imprisonment‑‑‑Bail was granted in circumstances . Tariq Bashir v. The State PLD 1995 SC 34 ref. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro for Applicant. G.A. Shahani, Addl. A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
The applicant is charged with an offence under section 17(1) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance. 197Q and is facing trial before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Larkana alongwith two others. Learned counsel for the applicant contends' that the name of the applicant does not appear in the F.I.R. He has been falsely implicated due to enmity and the offence is not punishable for more than seven years. Mr. G.A. Shahani, Addl. A.‑G. appearing for the State has conceded to the bail plea of the applicant by stating that the only evidence against the applicant is his identification after more than three weeks of the incident. While the offence prescribed minimum punishment of R.I. for three years, it does not specify any maximum sentence for imprisonment. Since no maximum punishment is prescribed for the alleged offence, the case against the applicant cannot be stretched in favour of the prosecution. Keeping in view the law laid down in the case of Tariq Bashir v. The State reported as PLD 1995 SC 34, bail is granted to the applicant subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of I the learned trial Court. H.B.T./G‑99/K Bail granted.