2006 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM QADIR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | GHULAM QADIR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 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: 2006 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM QADIR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- 3. Learned Additional Advocate-General in the circumstances, has not been able to controvert the contentions, raised on behalf of the applicant to the extent of mentioning the name of present applicant by co-accused.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Interim pre-arrest bail, confirmation of
Accused was not apprehended at the spot
Name of accused was disclosed by one of co accused--Case of accused, in circumstances called for further inquiry
Interim pre-arrest bail granted to accused was confirmed, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Applicant Ghulam Qadir is involved in Crime No.20 of 2005 registered against him along with other co-accused persons on 24-6-2005, on the report of S.I.P. Fazal Ali Qureshi.
2. Pre-arrest bail is pressed on the ground that the applicant has been implicated by the police in the case on account of political rivalry and that there is no evidence against the applicant except that his name was disclosed by co-accused namely Javed Ali.
3. Learned Additional Advocate-General in the circumstances, has not been able to controvert the contentions, raised on behalf of the applicant to the extent of mentioning the name of present applicant by co-accused.
4. We have considered the submissions and perused the material available on the record.
5. The perusal of F.I.R. itself reveals that the applicant was not apprehended' at the spot. His name was disclosed by one of the co- accused namely Javed Ali. The case of the applicant, therefore, calls for further inquiry. In the circumstances, interim pre-arrest, granted to the applicant vide order, dated 2-11-2005, is confirmed. H.B.T./G-14/K Bail confirmed.