1993 P Cr (PLP)

S. 497

Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.17/22

Bail, grant of

Case against accused seemed to be of simple house-trespass

Accused no doubt had been arrested by the owners of the adjoining houses, but nothing incriminating was found in his possession to justify an attempt to commit Haraabah on his part

Case of accused, therefore, was of further enquiry and he was admitted to bail accordingly. Sardar Muhammad Ishaq for Applicant. Abdul Hakeem Bijarani, AA.-G. for the State. Applicant is charged for offence under section 22 of Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance being outcome of F.I.R. No.528/92 of Police Station Qaidabad, registered on 28-12-1992. His application for bail moved in the Court of VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Hudood Court. Karachi East is rejected by order, dated 20-1-1993. Allegation against the applicant is that on 28-12-1992 while the complainant was not present at his house 3 persons including the applicant broke open the lock of his house and committed trespass. The neighbours were attracted on the noise inside the complainant's house and caught hold of applicant while two of his associates fled away. Applicant was handed over to the police where said F.I.R. was registered. It is contended by the learned Advocate for the applicant that there is no evidence on record that the intention of the applicant or for that matter the co-accused was to commit Haraabah and it may be a case of simple house trespass punishable under section 452 of P.P.C., maximum punishment for which would be 3 years. Nothing incriminating was recovered from the applicant to show that he alongwith others had broken open the lock of the house or that they were carrying such implements as would lead to an inference that the intention was to commit house-trespass or to commit Haraabah. Mr. Abdul Hakeem Bijarani, learned AA.-G. has frankly conceded that the case is of simple house-trespass and not an attempt to commit Haraabah so as to fall within section 22 of the Ordinance of 1979. Accused was no doubt arrested by the owners of the adjoining houses but as stated by the learned A.A.-G. nothing incriminating was found in his possession to justify that an attempt to commit Haraabah was made by the applicant. The learned Sessions Judge, who has rejected the bail application, has not given any reasons for rejecting the bail application except that the applicant had broken open locks of complainant's house and was caught by Mohallah people on the spot. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the case of the applicant is of further enquiry and he is entitled to bail. Applicant Ghulam Yaseen shall be released on bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The learned trial Court shall not be influenced by any observations in this order but would decide the case on the basis of evidence recorded before it. N.H.Q./G-334/K Bail allowed.