YLR 2009

2009 PLP 984 (YLR)

SARFARAZ — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Bail Application No.1201 of 2008, decided on 22nd October, 2008.
Honorable Judges
Ali Sain Dino Metlo, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2009 PLP 984 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Ali Sain Dino Metlo, J
Parties SARFARAZ — Applicant 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 984 (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 984 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ali Sain Dino Metlo, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 984 (YLR) (SARFARAZ — Applicant 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)

Representation

  • Syed Miran Muhammad Shah, Add. A-G. for Respondent.
  • ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J.--Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Addl. Advocate-General. The latter has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the stolen car was recovered from the possession of the applicant.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.392/34

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Allegation against accused was that he along with others, robbed the complainant of mobile telephone set and cash amount

Memo. of recovery of car had shown that a car was recovered from accused, but the chassis number or the engine number of the car was not mentioned in the said memo.

Nothing was available to show that the engine number or the chassis number of the car recovered from accused tallied with the engine number or the chassis number of the car robbed from the complainant

In the absence of any evidence in that regard it could not be said that the car was actually one that was robbed from the complainant

Matter required further inquiry

Accused was not put to the identification of the complainant and no reason had been assigned for such omission

Only inference which could be drawn would be that either the complainant had refused to implicate accused or the police knew that the complainant would not implicate him

Both the inferences lent support to accused's plea of innocence

Case of accused being fit for the grant of bail, he was released on bail in circumstances. Gul Muhammad Farooqui for Applicant.

Judgment & Decree

ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J.--Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Addl. Advocate-General. The latter has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the stolen car was recovered from the possession of the applicant. According to the prosecution, on 8-6-2008, at 2045 hours, near Sardar Complex, Block-5, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi, two young-men, out of which one was armed with a pistol, robbed complainant Muhammad Younus of his Suzuki Mehran Car bearing No.ASN-071, one mobile telephone set of Samsung Company any cash of Rs.4,200 on gunpoint. They were not previously known to him. The matter was reported to police, and the F.I.R, bearing No.349/08, was registered at police station, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi on the same day, at 2230 hours. On 28-7-2008, police claims to have arrested the applicant along with co-accused Rashid after an exchange of fires, while they were travelling in a Car bearing Registration Plate No.AKL-311.A pistol of .30 bore with four cartridges was seized from him. A Kalashinkov with 10 cartridges was seized from Rashid. One repeater shotgun of .12 bore, with four cartridges, and one pistol of .30 bore, with three cartridges were also recovered from the car. They were allegedly left by the companion of the applicant, who had managed to escape. Such F.I.R, bearing No.441/08, was registered against them at Police Station, Shah Latif Town, Karachi. It is stated that on 8-8-2008, the complainant identified the car seized from the accused to be his. The learned Sessions Judge, Malir has granted bail to the applicant in F.I.R. No.441/08, inter alia, on the ground that the prosecution story did not inspire much confidence in the facts and circumstances of the case. However, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Karachi East, has refused bail to the applicant in F.I.R. No.349/08 only on the ground that the stolen car was recovered from him. The memo. of recovery of the car shows that a Car bearing Registration No.AKL-311 was recovered from him. The chassis number or the engine number of the car are not mentioned in the memo. There is nothing to show that the engine number or the chassis number of the car recovered from the applicant tallied with the engine number or the chassis number of the car robbed from the 'complainant. In absence of any evidence in that regard, it cannot be said that the car bearing Registration No.AKL-311 was actually car No.ASN-071 robbed from the complainant. The matter requires only further enquiry. Moreover, the learned Sessions Judge, Malir has granted bail to the applicant in the case pertaining to the incident in which the car is alleged to have been recovered from him. An other important aspect of the case is that the applicant was not put to the identification of the complainant and no reason has been assigned for that. The only inference which can be drawn will be that either .the complainant had refused to implicate the applicant or the police knew that the complainant would not implicate him. Both the inferences lend support to applicant's plea of innocence. For all these reasons, the case of the applicant is fit for the grant of bail. Accordingly, he is directed to be released on bail on giving one surety in the sum of rupees one hundred thousand and personal bond in the like amount to the trial Court. H.B.T./S-32/K Bail granted.