2005 PLP 1600 (SCMR)
GHULAM MUJTABA JATOI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE through Advocate-General Sindh, Karachi — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1600 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | GHULAM MUJTABA JATOI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE through Advocate-General Sindh, Karachi — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1600 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1600 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1600 (SCMR) (GHULAM MUJTABA JATOI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE through Advocate-General Sindh, Karachi — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- THE STATE through Advocate-General Sindh, Karachi---Respondent
- Rasool Bux Unar, Advocate Supreme Court and Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, Additional Advocate-General, Sindh for the State.
- 4. Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, learned Additional Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the State does not oppose the bail in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.
Judgment & Decree
RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.
Petitioner is aggrieved by the High Court's order dated 6-5-2004 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.S-161 of 2004 declining bail in a case registered under sections 324, 379, 511, 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C.
2. After investigation charge-sheet against the petitioner and co-accused was not submitted for want of adequate and reliable evidence. Instead a report under section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted before the trial Magistrate, however, being not satisfied with the police report chose to summon the complainant and the witnesses and after recording their statements in the absence of the accused-petitioner issued a direction for submission of charge-sheet against them. While all other co-accused have been released on bail, petitioner has been denied his right of freedom on the premise that specific role of using weapon was ascribed to him.
3. On perusal of the record we are tentatively of the view that case of the petitioner requires further inquiry, as Investigating Agency found no cause for prosecution against him. Even otherwise witnesses appear to A have been examined by the Magistrate behind the back of the petitioner after about 1 month and 25 days.
4. Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, learned Additional Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the State does not oppose the bail in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.
5. In the result, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. Impugned orders of the trial Court and the High Court are set aside, and the petitioner is admitted to bail, subject to solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./G-59/S Bail granted.