2006 PLP 2987 (YLR)
KHIZER ABBAS and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2987 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | KHIZER ABBAS and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 2987 (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 2006 PLP 2987 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2987 (YLR) (KHIZER ABBAS and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zafar Iqbal Chohan for Petitioners.
- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 341, 355, 382, 411, 148 & 149---Bail, grant of---Medico-legal Report revealed that only simple injuries were found on the person of complainant falling within purview of S.337-L(ii), P.P.C. which was bailable offence---Possibility could not be ruled out for exaggerating the story by complainant who was a General Councillor and also clerk of an advocate---Accused were not previously involved in such like cases---Even otherwise, it was not specifically mentioned that accused had snatched amount from complainant---Recovery of some amount from the possession of accused did not connect them with commission of crime as denomination of notes had not been mentioned in the F.I.R.---Accused were behind the bars for the last seven months, but there was no likelihood of conclusion of the trial in near future---Bail could not be withheld as a punishment---Accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances.
- 2. The complainant has stated in the F.I.R. that he is General Councillor of the Union Council and also works as a clerk with Mr. Muhammad Tariq Khan Baluch, Advocate. On 27-5-2005 at about 8-00 a.m. he was coming in the Court on duty along with Ihsan Ullah who was sitting on the rear seat of motorcycle from his house. When they reached near Chah Mootivala, the accused persons came out from the shop and stood at the road who forcibly alighted down the complainant from the said motorcycle. Allah Wasaya co-accused was armed with Kalashnikov, Ghulam Abbas petitioner was armed with hunter and pistol and Khizar Abass petitioner was armed with 'Danda' and 'Churra'. Allah Wasaya asked the complainant to strip off the clothes and on the refusal of the complainant he made two fires in the air and Ghulam Abbas and Khizar Abbas petitioners along with two unknown persons who were armed with fire-arms tore the clothes of the complainant and also injured him with hunter and Danda. The accused persons also snatched wrist watch and purse of the complainant along with Rs.4,600 and also the Identity Card. In the meanwhile, from the back side on a motorcycle Qadir Baldish who was coming towards Bhakkar also reached there. Besides him other so many people gathered there. The accused persons not only made the complainant naked but also gave him beating. Hence this case.
- 6. According to the medico-legal report attached with this petition at page 14 only the simple injuries were found on the person of the complainant falling within the purview of section 337-L (ii), P.P.C., which is bailable offence and possibility cannot be ruled out for exaggerating the story by the complainant who is a General Councillor and also clerk of an Advocate. The petitioners are not previously involved in such-like cases. Even otherwise, it was not specifically mentioned that the petitioners had snatched the amount of Rs.4,600 from the complainant and recovery of Rs.3,000 from the possession of the petitioners does not connect them with the commission of the crime as denomination of the notes have not been mentioned in the F.I.R. It is also notable that the petitioners are behind the bars for the last 7 months but there is no likelihood of the conclusion of the trial in near future and bail cannot be withheld as a punishment as is laid down in PLD 1997 SC 81. Hence, this application is accepted and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (rupees one lac only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial /Illaqa Magistrate.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 341, 355, 382, 411, 148 & 149
Medico-legal Report revealed that only simple injuries were found on the person of complainant falling within purview of S.337-L(ii), P.P.C. which was bailable offence
Possibility could not be ruled out for exaggerating the story by complainant who was a General Councillor and also clerk of an advocate
Accused were not previously involved in such like cases
Even otherwise, it was not specifically mentioned that accused had snatched amount from complainant
Recovery of some amount from the possession of accused did not connect them with commission of crime as denomination of notes had not been mentioned in the F.I.R.
Accused were behind the bars for the last seven months, but there was no likelihood of conclusion of the trial in near future
Bail could not be withheld as a punishment
Accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances. PLD 1997 SC 81 ref. Miss Shazia Khalil for the State along with Zafar Ali, A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioners seek bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.152, dated 27-5-2005, registered under sections 382/341/411/355/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station, Saddar Bhakkar District Bhakkar on the application of Alam Sher.
2. The complainant has stated in the F.I.R. that he is General Councillor of the Union Council and also works as a clerk with Mr. Muhammad Tariq Khan Baluch, Advocate. On 27-5-2005 at about 8-00 a.m. he was coming in the Court on duty along with Ihsan Ullah who was sitting on the rear seat of motorcycle from his house. When they reached near Chah Mootivala, the accused persons came out from the shop and stood at the road who forcibly alighted down the complainant from the said motorcycle. Allah Wasaya co-accused was armed with Kalashnikov, Ghulam Abbas petitioner was armed with hunter and pistol and Khizar Abass petitioner was armed with 'Danda' and 'Churra'. Allah Wasaya asked the complainant to strip off the clothes and on the refusal of the complainant he made two fires in the air and Ghulam Abbas and Khizar Abbas petitioners along with two unknown persons who were armed with fire-arms tore the clothes of the complainant and also injured him with hunter and Danda. The accused persons also snatched wrist watch and purse of the complainant along with Rs.4,600 and also the Identity Card. In the meanwhile, from the back side on a motorcycle Qadir Baldish who was coming towards Bhakkar also reached there. Besides him other so many people gathered there. The accused persons not only made the complainant naked but also gave him beating. Hence this case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the case is totally false and the petitioners are innocent, who are also not previously involved in such-like cases except Allah Wasaya co-accused, and that the offences except under section 382, P.P.C. do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and offence under section 382, P.P.C. is not attracted.
4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application on the ground that the petitioners had participated actively in the occurrence and offence under section 382, P.P.C. falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record with due care and caution.
6. According to the medico-legal report attached with this petition at page 14 only the simple injuries were found on the person of the complainant falling within the purview of section 337-L (ii), P.P.C., which is bailable offence and possibility cannot be ruled out for exaggerating the story by the complainant who is a General Councillor and also clerk of an Advocate. The petitioners are not previously involved in such-like cases. Even otherwise, it was not specifically mentioned that the petitioners had snatched the amount of Rs.4,600 from the complainant and recovery of Rs.3,000 from the possession of the petitioners does not connect them with the commission of the crime as denomination of the notes have not been mentioned in the F.I.R. It is also notable that the petitioners are behind the bars for the last 7 months but there is no likelihood of the conclusion of the trial in near future and bail cannot be withheld as a punishment as is laid down in PLD 1997 SC
81. Hence, this application is accepted and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (rupees one lac only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial /Illaqa Magistrate. H.B.T./K-56/L Bail granted.