YLR 2008

2008 PLP 1855 (YLR)

ABDUL GHAFFAR and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Bail Application No.792 of 2005, decided on 2nd July, 2007.
Honorable Judges
Nadeem Azhar Siddiqi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 1855 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Nadeem Azhar Siddiqi, J
Parties ABDUL GHAFFAR and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1855 (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 2008 PLP 1855 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Nadeem Azhar Siddiqi, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1855 (YLR) (ABDUL GHAFFAR and another — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Mr. Nasir Ahmed Abro, Advocate for the State has opposed the grant of bail application and submitted that applicants were arrested red-handed along with arms and robbed property and no identification parade is necessary.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324, 353, 412, 148 & 149

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

Bail, refusal of

Accused were arrested just after the incident and the police had recovered illegal arms and robbed articles from Them

Sufficient material was available on record to connect accused persons with the offence which fell under the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.

No malice had been shown towards police for falsely implicating accused persons

In presence of incriminating material available on record, it could not be said that no reasonable grounds existed for believing that accused persons had not committed an offence falling under the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr. P. C.

Accused persons having failed to make out a case for grant of bail, their bail application was dismissed. Jai Jai Veshnu Mange Ram for Applicants. Nisar Ahmed Abro for the State.

Judgment & Decree

NADEEM AZHAR SIDDIQUI, J.

The applicant is facing trial in Crime No.93 of 2005 of P.S Lakhi Ghulam Shah under sections 324, 353, 148, 149, 412, P.P.C. and 17/3 E.H.O. The allegations against the applicants are that they have robbed Royal City Coach No.4577-LSC. The police after receiving the information reached at the place of incident and by tracing the footprints reached houses of Magsi community and encircled their houses where 8 armed persons with open faces were present out of them two were armed with K.K. three with guns and three were armed with T.T. pistols, and one person having K.K. and another having gun had bags on their shoulders and one bag on his head. They directly fired at the police with intention to murder and the police also fired in their defence. The present applicants surrendered before the police. From the accused Abdul Ghaffar one K.K. and empty magazine and one bag of black colour was recovered in which small binoculars, one damaged mobile charger of black colour and 13 cassettes of VCR, were lying. From accused Muhammad Nawaz @ Papoo police recovered one SBBL gun .12 bore in working condition, one cloth bag in which 20 ladies suits of various colours were lying and one small medical box. The applicant has moved bail application before the trial Court who has dismissed the same on the ground that both the accused are involved in heinous offence which has fallen within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the F.I.R. was lodged after delay of 13 hours and no features and identification marks of accused persons were mentioned in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that in other connected matters the applicants were released on bail. He further submits that this is a case of further inquiry as no identification parade of the applicants was held. Mr. Nasir Ahmed Abro, Advocate for the State has opposed the grant of bail application and submitted that applicants were arrested red-handed along with arms and robbed property and no identification parade is necessary. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record made available before me. In this matter the applicants were arrested just after the incident and the police have recovered illegal arms and robbed articles from them. Sufficient material is available on record to connect the accused persons in an offence which is falling under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. No malice has been shown towards police for falsely implicating the applicants. In presence of incriminating material available on record, it cannot be said that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the applicants have not committed an offence falling under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The applicants have failed to make out a case for grant of bail. In view of the above, bail application is dismissed. H.B.T. /A-44/K Application dismissed.