2022 PLP 609 (SCMR)
Mst. KAINAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2022 PLP 609 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Munib Akhtar and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. KAINAT BIBI — 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 2022 PLP 609 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2022 PLP 609 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Munib Akhtar and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2022 PLP 609 (SCMR) (Mst. KAINAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mir Afzal Malik, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Khurram Masood Kiani, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Niaz Ullah Khan Niazi, Advocate General, Islamabad with Nawaz, I.O. for the State.
- She has been denied bail throughout, lastly by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Islamabad High Court vide impugned order dated 01.10.2021, an order, strenuously defended by the learned Advocate General Islamabad on the ground that trial, being in progress with an accelerated pace is likely to conclude soon and, thus, it would be rather inexpedient to release her near fag-end of the case.
- 3. Be that as it may, offences complained do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Doors for petitioner's release, being a female with no past record, are statutorily wider and, thus, her continuous detention, is certainly serving no useful purpose.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 01.10.2021 passed by the Islamabad High Court Islamabad in Criminal Misc. No. 931-S of 2021)
Ss. 167(5) & 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 379, 380 & 381
Theft by female house maid
Offences alleged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Doors for release of accused, being a female with no past record, were statutorily wider and, thus, her continuous detention, was serving no useful purpose
Evidentiary value of the stolen gold ornaments, allegedly recovered on disclosure of the accused, could best be adjudged during the trial
Furthermore the accused was held in police custody in violation of S. 167(5), Cr.P.C.
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was admitted to bail. Niaz Ullah Khan Niazi, Advocate General, Islamabad with Nawaz, I.O. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Behind bars since, 24.4.2021, the petitioner, a maid employed in a household within the precincts of Police Station Shalimar Islamabad, was suspected by her employer to have stolen gold ornaments valuing Rs.2.5 million; during investigation, pursuant to her disclosure, she led to the recovery of some of the stolen articles. She has been denied bail throughout, lastly by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Islamabad High Court vide impugned order dated 01.10.2021, an order, strenuously defended by the learned Advocate General Islamabad on the ground that trial, being in progress with an accelerated pace is likely to conclude soon and, thus, it would be rather inexpedient to release her near fag-end of the case.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Be that as it may, offences complained do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Doors for petitioner's release, being a female with no past record, are statutorily wider and, thus, her continuous detention, is certainly serving no useful purpose. Evidentiary value of recovery dated 25.4.2021, allegedly attributed to the petitioner, au fait, accomplished by a male police officer in violation of subsection (5) of section 167 of the Code ibid is to be best adjudged during the trial inasmuch as the petitioner was taken into custody on 24.4.2021 and could not be held in police custody in violation thereof. A case for grant of bail stands made out. Petition is converted into appeal and allowed. Appellant/petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail on her furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. MWA/K-4/SC Bail granted.