1999 PLP 1053 (MLD)
KAMAL — Petitioner Versus SARDAR ALI and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1999 PLP 1053 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KAMAL — Petitioner Versus SARDAR ALI and another — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 1053 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 1053 (MLD)?
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: 1999 PLP 1053 (MLD) (KAMAL — Petitioner Versus SARDAR ALI and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Khanzada Ajmalzeb Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497 (2)
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17(3)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.411
Bail, grant of-- Accused was not named in the F.I.R.
Occurrence having taken place at night time identity of accused could not be ascertained, particularly when no identification parade was held in the case
Nothing incriminating had been recovered from the possession of accused
Reasonable grounds did not exist for believing that accused was connected with the commission of the offence and his case needed further inquiry
Judgment & Decree
Kh. Azhar Rashid, A.A.-G. for the State Complainant (absent). Date of hearing: 2nd September, 1998 Arguments heard. Record of the case perused.
2. There is no need to give the brief history of the case here once again as the same has been given in detail by the Additional Sessions Judge-I Peshawar, Syed Wajahat Ali Shah, in the Impugned judgment dated 24-3-1998.
3. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been charged/named in the F.I.R, for having committed the offence for which he has now been arrested and is behind the bars. The occurrence took place at night time, therefore, the identity of the culprits could not be ascertained without first holding the identification parade. Since no identification parade has been held by the prosecution so far, therefore, the question of petitioner's having been identified by the complainant/respondent No. 1 does not arise. The petitioner after his arrest/police custody has not confessed his guilt so far. Besides, nothing has been recovered from his possession which may involve him in the commission of the offence charged with.
4. Reasonable grounds do not exist for believing that the petitioner is connected with the commission of the offence. His case is, therefore, that of further inquiry.
5. This petition is accepted. The petitioner shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case, provided he furnishes ball bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000 (Rs. One lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
6. The Additional Registrar shall see that the sureties are respectable persons and hail from the settled areas of Distt: Peshawar and have sufficient property in their names. The property documents as well as the copies of the identity 'cards of the sureties shall be obtained for record by the Additional Registrar of this Court. N.H.Q./180/P Bail granted.