1994 P Cr (PLP)
Syed KAMRANUDDIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Syed KAMRANUDDIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 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: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (Syed KAMRANUDDIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34/342/506-B/365
Accused was not shown as an accused in the case either in the F.I.R. or in the statements originally recorded by police under S.161, Cr.P.C. and he was subsequently implicated therein after his interrogation in some other case-- Case against accused, therefore, required further enquiry
Judgment & Decree
MAMOON KAZI, J.
The applicant is stated to be one of the co -accused who had kidnapped one Nadeem son of Mst. Rasheedan Begum, the complainant in the case. It has been alleged that on 23-9-1991, co-accused Jawed Langra, Taqi, Naeem Chishti and Ayaz took him to a torture cell and after torturing him caused his death. Thereafter, on the same day the complainant was called by the accused at the torture cell and her tumb impression was taken on a plain piece of paper. Thereafter, the complainant was told that her son had died and would be buried by the accused themselves. The accused also threatened the complainant that in case she lodged F.I.R. in respect of the incident, she would also meet the same fate. However, F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant on 1-7-1992. As is clear from the circumstances of the case, the name of the applicant did not originally transpire in the F.I.R. where names of only Jawed Langra, Taqi, Naeem Chishti and Ayaz were mentioned as accused in the-case. The challan further shows that the present applicant was arrested in connection with another crime registered under section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance and during his interrogation it came to light that he had also taken part in the above crime. Thereafter, further statement of the complainant was recorded by the police under section 161, Cr.P.C. alongwith the statements of Mazhar Ali and Babar Ali and it was there that the applicant was named as one of the co-accused in the case. The above circumstances clearly indicate that the case against the applicant requires further inquiry. His name did not originally transpire in the F.I.R. or the statements of the witnesses recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. by the police. The F.I.R. further shows that only the accused named therein were stated to have committed the said crime. It is also pertinent to point out that more or less under similar circumstances bail has been granted by us to the applicant in another case. For the aforesaid reasons, bail is granted to accused Syed Kamranuddin in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q./K-344/K Bail granted.