2016 PLP 1935 (MLD)
BAKHT ALAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2016 PLP 1935 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar (Bannu Bench) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | BAKHT ALAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2016 PLP 1935 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2016 PLP 1935 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar (Bannu Bench) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 PLP 1935 (MLD) (BAKHT ALAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zar Badshah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.395
Only a sum of Rs.5000 was allegedly recovered from the residential room of accused
Mere recovery of such small amount from a person, would not per se hold him to be linked with the commission of the offence; as long as the same was not proved to be the stolen cash amount from the house of the complainant
Local Police spurred into action against accused, at the instance of the complainant through his statement under S.164, Cr.P.C.
Complainant, present in the court along with his duly sworn affidavit, stated to have satisfied himself about the innocence of accused and expressed his "no objection" over his release on bail
Taking a tentative assessment of the available record, coupled with the sworn affidavit of the complainant, case of accused called for further probe into the matter, which entitled him to bail
Accused was granted bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.
The petitioner seeks bail in case FIR No. 447 dated 11.12.2014 under sections 395, P.P.C., Police Station Rustam Mardan after being refused the said concession by the learned court below. Arguments heard and available record perused.
2. As detailed in the FIR, on 11.12.2014,the complainant reported to the police that while he along with other inmates of the house were asleep, at 02:15 a.m., 6/7 persons duly armed entered his house and after tying their hands, they took away huge cash amount, laptop, LCD, a mobile set and ear-rings weighing one tola from the mother of the complainant and ID cards. The complainant then recorded his statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. on 23.1.2015 and charged the accused-petitioner along with his co-accused for the commission of the offence. In the recovery memo, as against the recoveries of various items at the instance of the other co-accused, only a sum of Rs.5000/- was allegedly recovered from the residential room of the accused-petitioner. The mere recovery of such small amount from a person would not per se hold him to be linked with the commission of the offence as long as the same is not proved to be the stolen cash amount from the house of the complainant. More so, it was at the instance of the complainant through his statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. when the local police spurred into action against the accused-petitioner. However, the complainant present in the court today along with his duly sworn affidavit (placed on file) states to have satisfied himself about the innocence of the accused-petitioner and expresses his no objection over his release on bail. Taking a tentative assessment of the available record coupled with the sworn affidavit of the complainant, the case of the accused-petitioner indeed calls for further probe into the matter and thus entitling him to bail. Resultantly, this bail application is allowed and the accused-petitioner is granted bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court concerned which shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. Before parting with this order, it is directed that any observations recorded in this order, being purely tentative in nature, should in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial Court where the case be decided on its own merits after recording evidence. HBT/221/P Bail granted.