2010 P Cr (PLP)
ZAIN-UL-ABIDIN — Petitioner Versus LAL MUHAMMAD and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ZAIN-UL-ABIDIN — Petitioner Versus LAL MUHAMMAD and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 P Cr (PLP) (ZAIN-UL-ABIDIN — Petitioner Versus LAL MUHAMMAD and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Noor Alam Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.419/420
Only allegation against accused was that he had prepared a fake transfer letter and fraudulently got registered the vehicle in his name
Question as to whether the facts alleged against accused constituted an offence punishable under Ss.419 & 420, P.P.C., was a matter requiring further inquiry
Judgment & Decree
SAID MAROOF KHAN, J.
The petitioner Zainul Abidin being involved in a case under sections 419/420, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. No.513, dated 1-8-2006 registered at Police Station East Cantt. Peshawar has filed the instant petition for his release on bail on the ground that the provisions of section 419, P.P.C. are not applicable in this case whereas section 420, P.P.C. is bailable and that the evidence on record is also not connecting the petitioner with the crime.
2. The learned State Counsel strenuously resisted the bail petition contending that the petitioner had fraudulently got registered the vehicle of the complainant in his name through a fake transfer letter and that the evidence on record prima facie connects him with the crime in question, therefore, the bail petition deserves dismissal.
3. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. It is an admitted fact that the complainant Lal Muhammad had sold the vehicle in question to one Abdul Khalil. However, the sale consideration was agreed to be paid in instalments. The purchaser paid some amount to the complainant but failed to pay the remaining instalments and he had subsequently sold the vehicle to Zainul Abidin petitioner.
4. The sale in favour of the petitioner is undisputed. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he had prepared a fake transfer letter and fraudulently got registered the vehicle in his name. The question as to whether the facts alleged against the petitioner do constitute an offence punishable under sections 419 and 420, P.P.C. is a matter requiring further enquiry, therefore, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.5,00,000 (five lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to' the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate. H.B.T./209/P Bail granted.