2005 PLP 3360 (YLR)
AIJAZ ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 3360 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, J |
| Parties | AIJAZ ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 3360 (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 2005 PLP 3360 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Rahmat Hussain Jafferi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 3360 (YLR) (AIJAZ ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- The learned Advocate for the applicant has stated that this is a case of attempt of robbery; that the story is unnatural; that no empty bullets were secured from the place of incident; that the Government rifle which was allegedly taken away by the culprits was secured from 1 K.M. away from the place of incident. He has relied upon 1999 PCr.LJ 308.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.393
Accused was alleged to have attempted to rob motor cycle of prosecution witness who had no grudge against accused
No motive existed for prosecution witness to falsely involve accused
Had police not intercepted, accused would have succeeded in robbing motor cycle
If accused of robbery were released on bail, then Society would feel unsafe
All prosecution witnesses had supported prosecution case
Reasonable grounds being available to believe that accused was guilty of the crime as alleged by prosecution, he was not entitled to concession of bail. 1999 PCr.LJ 308 ref. Sher Muhammad Shar for Applicant. Zubair Ahmed Rajput for the State.
Judgment & Decree
RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.
(1) Granted.
2. This is a case of attempt to commit motor cycle robbery which took place on 25-7-2004 on the link road of Gambat. It is alleged that the P.W. Iqbal Hussain was on his Motor Cycle when 4 persons intercepted him and tried to rob the Motor Cycle. The said P.W. raised cries which attracted the police. The police intercepted the robbers, there was exchange of harsh words and fighting in between the robbers and the police. The police were successful in apprehending one robber namely Aijaz the other robbers ran away. In the meanwhile D.S.P. came and chased the robbers but was unsuccessful. The learned Advocate for the applicant has stated that this is a case of attempt of robbery; that the story is unnatural; that no empty bullets were secured from the place of incident; that the Government rifle which was allegedly taken away by the culprits was secured from 1 K.M. away from the place of incident. He has relied upon 1999 PCr.LJ
308. The learned State counsel has no objection to grant of bail on the ground that there was no medical certificate for the injury on the person of P.W. that Government rifle was secured at some distance from the place of incident. However he has stated that all the P.Ws have supported the prosecution case. I have given due consideration to the arguments, gone through the material placed on record and found that the incident took place at 7-15 p.m, in which the accused attempted to rob the motor cycle of P.W. 1gba1 Hussain. The P.W. Iqbal Hussain has no grudge against the accused. There is no motive for him to falsely involve the applicant. Had the police not intercepted the culprits would have succeeded in robbing the motor cycle. The incident of robbery is increasing day by day therefore some stringent steps are required A to -be taken to curb this menace. If the accused of robbery are released on bail then the society will feel unsafe. It will also be a danger to the society. All the P.Ws, have supported the prosecution case. From the material available on the record there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the crime as alleged by the prosecution, therefore he is not entitled to the concession of bail. Consequently the bail application is dismissed. H.B.T./A-245/K Bail refused.