2010 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD HANIF alias TANGO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD HANIF alias TANGO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Control of Narocotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss. 6/9(c) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Control of Narocotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Ss. 6/9(c) 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 Karachi 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) (MUHAMMAD HANIF alias TANGO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324/353/186/34
Judgment & Decree
SALMAN ANSARI, J.
This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant/accused who was on 26-7-2008 at about 1030 hours arrested by the police personnel of Lyari Town, Police Station Bughdadi. After exchange of firing 1500 grams of charas from the applicant and a 9 mm pistol were recovered with 7 empties of 9 m.m. pistol and 3 empties of T.T. Pistol and remaining empties of government weapons used by the police were recovered from the spot, hence a case under sections 324/353/186/34, P.P.C. was made out against the applicant who was subsequently granted bail by the learned Special Judge, CNS-II, Karachi for the offence punishable under section 6/9(c) of CNS Act, 1997 vide order dated 7-10-2008.
2. Learned counsel for applicant has argued that this is a case of ineffective firing and this court has been pleased to grant bail where no injury was sustained by any police personnal of the police party or by any other person of the locality. The applicant has been granted bail in the connected case and the circumstances where no private person was associated with alleged recovery, hence the case of made out of further enquiry to determine the role played by the applicant who is falsely implicated in his case. In support of his contention the learned counsel for applicant has placed reliance in the case of Wadero Ghulam Hyder v. The State (1994 PCr.LJ 1772) and Abdul Ghafoor v. The State (1996 PCr.LJ 1573).
3. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General has opposed this bail application on the ground that after encounter the applicant was apprehended and recovery as mentioned above was effected from the applicant.
4. Under the circumstances where ineffective firing is alleged, and relying upon the case law cited, matter would require further enquiry to determine the role actually played in the present case. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. The applicant be released subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 100,000 and execution P.R. bond in the like amount to satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./M-19/K??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.