2007 PLP 29 (MLD)
BAGH ALI alias PERVAIZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 29 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | BAGH ALI alias PERVAIZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 29 (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 2007 PLP 29 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 29 (MLD) (BAGH ALI alias PERVAIZ — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Bilal Butt for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.397 & 458
F.I.R. promptly lodged
Accused was involved in the case on basis of supplementary statement recorded more than two years after the occurrence
Identification parade not held
No likelihood of trial to be concluded in near future
Complainant had lodged F.I.R. that in mid-night three unknown persons whose features were given in F.I.R. armed with weapons, along with 5/6 other unknown persons entered his house, who after confining complainant and his house mates in a room committed theft of gold articles
Accused/petitioner was involved in the case on supplementary statement of complainant which was recorded after more than two years of occurrence
Accused contended that he was in jail for last one year and no identification parade had been held, so far and that no recovery had been effected from accused
Accused was involved in the case on ground of supplementary statement of complainant recorded more than two years after occurrence according to which accused allegedly made extra-judicial confession
No recovery had been effected from the accused
Since arrest of accused, no identification parade had been held
No possibility was there that trial was to be concluded in near future
No evidence was available on record that offences under Ss.397 & 458, P.P.C. were committed by accused
Petitioner was admitted to bail.
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.
The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 51 registered with Police Station Makhdoom Rashid, Multan on 16-4-2002 for an offence under sections 397/458, P.P.C.
2. According to the F.I.R., the complainant along with his brother and his children were sleeping in his house. At about 12.30 mid-night three unknown persons whose features were described in the F.I.R. armed with weapons along with 5/6 unknown persons entered in the house of complainant and confined the complainant, his wife and children in a room. On resistance they were beaten by the accused persons. The accused searched in the room. After then brother and son of the complainant were also brought from their respective rooms and were confined with the complainant in the same room. It is further stated in the F.I.R. that the accused searched in the house for 1-1/2 hours and committed theft of gold articles valuing Rs.60,000.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not nominated in the F.I.R.; that the petitioner was involved on the supplementary statement of the complainant which was recorded after two years and four months of the occurrence; that the petitioner is in jail since 7-12-2004 and till date no identification has been held; and that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner.
4. Conversely, learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed this petition.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The occurrence took place on 16-4-2002, the F.I.R. was recorded on the same day and after two years and four months of the above said occurrence i.e. on 1-8-2004 supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded, according to which all the accused including the petitioner made extra-judicial confession before him. The petitioner was arrested on 7-12-2004; no recovery has been made from his possession. The challan has been submitted in the Court but no progress has been made. Since his arrest no identification parade was conducted by the police. Neither the charge has been farmed nor copies under section 265-C, Cr.P.C. have been delivered to the petitioner. There is no possibility of conclusion of trial in the near future. There is no evidence about the offences under sections 397/458, P.P.C. against the petitioner on the record. In this context reliance is placed on 2005 PCr.LJ
572. In this view of the matter, without touching the merits of the case, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. S.M.B./B-37/L Petition allowed.