YLR 2009

2009 PLP 95 (YLR)

MUKHTIAR alias MUKHO and 3 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Bail Application No.1 of 2008, decided on 23rd June, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Munib Ahmad Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2009 PLP 95 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Munib Ahmad Khan, J
Parties MUKHTIAR alias MUKHO and 3 others — 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 2009 PLP 95 (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 2009 PLP 95 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Munib Ahmad Khan, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 95 (YLR) (MUKHTIAR alias MUKHO and 3 others — 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)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.354

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

F.I.R., showed that complainant, a female, had travelled a mile from her house to collect the fodder for the animals near the Katcha area where alleged incident happened

Was to be seen as to why a lady in lone capacity travelled to the area, while no public was available; that as to how the husband and brother reached the place of incident by crossing one mile distance in a shortest time when accused were busy in committing crime and ran away after seeing them; that it was to be investigated as to how the information in respect to the incident reached the husband of the lady and his brother and whether they were present in the house, which was a time for a work for men folk

All said factual position needed further investigation

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Abdul Rasool Naich along with Zulifqar Ali Sangi for Applicants. Muhammad Iqbal Mahar A.A.-G. for the State. Ghulam Sarwar Korai for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

MUNIB AHMAD KHAN, J.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that because of some enmity; between the parties the case has been lodged. He has pointed out that according to the version disclosed in the F.I.R. the complaint is false as four persons allegedly unclothed a lady and her chasisty and modesty was allegedly lowered as she was shown naked to the public. He submits that there is no other person who has been cited as a witness while only two persons, that is husband and his brother reached there and on seeing them the accused persons ran away towards katcha. He submits that distance between the house of the complainant and place of incident is about a mile away and it was not possible for both the male members of the complainant side to reach the site and that, had it been the situation the accused persons, who were allegedly four and were near the katcha area, would have killed the complainant and her two male companions as it could have been easy for them. He submits that the story is concocted. Learned counsel for the applicant has further pointed out an affidavit of Rasool Bux which is real uncle of the complainant, who is present in Court and has stated that said Rasool Bux has dubbed entire incident as false. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application by stating that the names of the accused persons have been mentioned and the factual position shows that she was subjected to humiliation as her modesty and chasisty was opened to general public, therefore; the accused are liable to remain in jail. Learned State counsel has half heartedly opposed the bail application. I have examined a factual position and have noted that according to the version in the F.I.R. complainant has travelled a mile from her house to collect the fodder for the animal near the katcha area where the alleged incident happens, now it is to be seen as to why a lady in her lone capacity travelled to the area of katcha while there were no public and there alleged incident took place. It is also to be gathered as to how the husband and brother reached the place of incident by crossing one mile distance in a shortest time when the accused were busy in committing crime and ran away after seeing them. It is also a matter to be investigated how the information in respect to the incident reached to the husband of the lady and his brother and whether they were present in the house at 9-00 a.m. which is a time for a work for men folk. All these factual positions need further investigation. Hence the applicants are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 each and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./M-177/K Bail granted.