2003 PLP 1665 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD RIND and 3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1665 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RIND and 3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1665 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1665 (MLD)?
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: 2003 PLP 1665 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD RIND and 3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(3)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.147/148/149
Accused had stated that elders of the parties had intervened and were making efforts to settle differences between accused and complainant party
Accused also assured that complainant party had no objection if bail was granted to accused as it would facilitate resolution of long-drawn dispute between the parties-- Complainant and two injured persons present in Court had made a statement under their signature duly supported by affidavit in which they had confirmed the statement of accused and had stated that possibility existed for resolving the controversy
Judgment & Decree
S. Madad Ali Shah for Applicants. Rasheed A. Qureshi, Asstt. A.-G. Applicants facing trial in Crime No.5 of 2002, Police Station Lundo District Sanghar, under section 17(3) of the Offences Against Property (E & H), 1979, 147, 148, 149, P.P.C. seek bail. At the very outset it is stated by Mr. Madad Ali Shah, learned counsel for the applicants- that elders of the parties have intervened and are making efforts to bring about differences between the applicants and the complainant party. The complainant party, according to him, has no objection if the bail is extended to the applicants, as it will facilitate the resolution of the longdrawn dispute between the parties. Complainant of the crime Muhammad Haneef son of Muhammad Siddique is present in Court and has made a statement under his signature duly supported by the affidavit to the above effect and so also similar statements have been made by Sikandar Ali and Ghulam Abbas, the alleged injured. I have inquired from all the three persons, they confirm the statement of Mr. Madad Ali Shah, learned counsel for the applicants and state that there is a possibility of resolving the controversy. Learned State counsel under the circumstances "states that let the bail be granted as it will be in aid of bringing the gap between the parties and any order otherwise will impede the efforts of the elders. In view of the foregoing the applicants are admitted to bail, however, subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.100,000 each and P. R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-512/K Bail granted.