1994 P Cr (PLP)
AKBAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AKBAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (AKBAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Zafar Pasha Chaudhry for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 380/324/458
Bail, grant of-- Accused had deliberately suppressed in his bail application the fact of his previous bail application having been dismissed by High Court on merits-- Accused on account of his such conduct was not entitled to the grant of bail as he had not come to Court with clean hands
Even otherwise on merits the accused had no case as he was arrested at the spot and the ornaments were recovered from him
Judgment & Decree
Sh. Muhammad Ishaq for the State. Date of hearing: 14th November; 1993. This is third bail application by the petitioner in a case registered against him vide F.I.R. No.114, dated 3-3-1993, under section 380/324,/458, P.P.C., at Police Station Chak Jhumra, District Faisalabad.
2. Briefly the allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith his co accused trespassed the house of the complainant and clandestinely took away Rs.4,700 and certain golden ornaments. When the complainant alongwith his sons followed them, one of the accused fired at Shahid Saleem son of the complainant which hit him on his right arm. Thereafter, the petitioner was apprehended alongwith his gun, at some distance from the spot.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier bail application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No.1578/B of 1993 of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 16-5-1993 as having been withdrawn. He contended that the petitioner is behind the bars since 3-3-1993 without any progress in the trial. The petitioner was involved in this case falsely and the recovery has been planted upon him, hence the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry and he is entitled to bail.
4. The learned counsel for the State assisted by the Police Officer has brought this fact to my notice that the petitioner's earlier bail application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No.2395/B of 1993 was dismissed by me vide order, dated 13-7-1993. The petitioner has filed the present petition by suppressing this fact, hence he has not come to this Court with clean hands, hence he is not entitled to the grant of bail. He also submitted that the petitioner was arrested at the spot.
5. I have gone through the file of the case. It appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner while moving the present bail application only gave reference of Criminal Miscellaneous No.1578/B of 1993 and deliberately suppressed the reference of Criminal Miscellaneous No.2395/B of 1993, whereby I dismissed his bail application vide order, dated 13-7-1993.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail on account of his conduct as he has not come to this Court with clean hands. Even otherwise on merits, the petitioner has no case as observed by me in order, dated 13-7-1993 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.2395/B of 1993 whereby I dismissed his 8 petition for: bail on merits on the ground that he was arrested at the spot and the ornaments were recovered from him. This petition stands dismissed. N.H.Q./A-571/L Bail refused.