2002 PLP 3897 (YLR)
Mirza ABID BAIG‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 3897 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Bashir A. Mujahid, J |
| Parties | Mirza ABID BAIG‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 3897 (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 2002 PLP 3897 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Bashir A. Mujahid, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 3897 (YLR) (Mirza ABID BAIG‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Azhar Naveed Shah for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 18th July, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860). Ss.382/411‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Further inquiry‑‑‑Accused was not put to identification parade and the question whether he had committed offence under S. 382, P. P. C. was a matter of further probe and inquiry‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Ch. Riaz Ahmad for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Azhar Naveed Shah for Petitioner. Ch. Riaz Ahmad for the State. Date of hearing: 18th July, 2002. Mirza Abid Baig son of Bashir Baig petitioner seeks after arrest bail in case F.I.R. No 481, dated 17‑3‑2001 under section 382/411, P.P.C. registered with Police Station Waris Khan at the instance of Zaeem Ibrar with the allegation that he was driving his Honda Motorcycle which was snatched by two unknown persons. The petitioner was arrested on 8‑9‑2001 in the instant case and earlier he was arrested at Jhelum in case F.I.R. No.61, dated 11‑2‑2001 with Police Station Saddar Jhelum under section 380, P.P.C. and during the investigation of that case on disclosure of the petitioner the motorcycle/case property of the instant case was recovered from one Muhammad Zaman. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not put to the identification parade and full description of the accused was also not given in the F.I.R., that mere recovery of motorcycle on his disclosure when he was in police custody under section 382, P.P.C. does not connect him with commission of crime and no material progress has been made in the trial after his arrest and submission of the challan. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition by arguing that challan of the case has been submitted in Court on 2‑10‑2001 and instead of grant of bail, trial Court be directed to conclude the trial expeditiously. Heard. Keeping in view the circumstances of the case and after hearing the learners counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioner was not put to the identification parade and whether he committed offence under section 382, P.P.C. is a matter of further probe and inquiry, therefore, he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bait bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./A‑661/L Bail granted.