YLR 2002

2002 PLP 621 (YLR)

GHULAM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Bail Application No.211 of 2002, decided on 14th March, 2002.
Honorable Judges
Wahid Bux Brohi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2002 PLP 621 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Wahid Bux Brohi, J
Parties GHULAM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 621 (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 621 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Wahid Bux Brohi, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 621 (YLR) (GHULAM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Date of hearing 14th March 2002.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497 (2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 420/468/471

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

F.I.R. was - filed after about one month of alleged incident and accused was arrested after eight days of filing the F.I.R.

Offence under S. 420, P. P. C. was bailable while offences under Ss. 468 & 471, P. P. C were punishable with seven years only

Case of accused, in circumstances, did not fall within prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr. P. C. - Offences under Ss. 468 & 471, P. P. C. were non cognizable, but no permission had been sought for challan

Case against accused requiring further inquiry, accused was admitted to bail. Raja Sikandar Khan Yasir for Applicant. Masooda Siraj, State Counsel for the State.

Judgment & Decree

Raja Sikandar Khan Yasir for Applicant. Masooda Siraj, State Counsel for the State. Date of hearing 14th March 2002. Applicant Ghulam Hussain .has sought bail in a case registered at Police Station Baghdadi for an offence punishable under sections 420/468/471, P.P.C. on the basis of F.I.R. lodged by Mansoor Ahmed wherein he stated the facts as under:- " . I am residing at above- mentioned address and have been working in Agfa Gabaert Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd., as Regional Sales Manager for the last 15 years who has a contract with Pak International Goods Transport Company for the period of 20 years in respect of transportation of goods. On 1-11-2001 the above-mentioned goods were booked with Pakistan International Goods Transport Company from Lahore to Karachi vide Belty No.8634. Whereupon I contacted on phone in the office of Goods Transport Company about the arrivals of goods who confirmed the same whereupon 14-11-2001 I sent my Driver Taj Ali to receive the said goods from the Goods Transport Company but my Driver informed me on telephone from the office of the Goods Transport Company that the said goods have already been taken/received by somebody else. On receipt of this information we reached to the office of Goods Transport Company at about 2.00 p.m. and enquired from Mr. Jaffar In charge of Goods Transport Company who informed us that some unknown person has received our goods by showing Letter pad of our company which letter. was checked by me and found that someone received the goods by forging letter pad of our company and immediately informed my superior officers and after making unsuccessful hectic search of our goods I lodged the F.I.R. after consultation with my superior officers against unknown person who has taken the delivery of our goods from the Goods Transport Company from the basis of forged letter pad of Agfa Company. " The incident had taken place on 13-11-2001 but the F.I.R. was lodged on 8-12-2001 and the applicant was arrested on the basis of spy information on 16-12-2001. Recovery of 100 cartons of Agfa Films was made from a factory owned by one Ismail on 19-12-2001 allegedly on pointation of applicant but the said Ismail had sworn an affidavit denying the alleged transaction w recovery. Thereafter, on 30-12-2001 and 21-1-2002 recoveries of more cartons were made but not on pointation of the applicant. Learned counsel for applicant argued that the offence under section 420, P.P.C. is bailable while the offences under sections 468 and 471, P.P.C. are punishable with 7 years only as such the case of applicant did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. He contended that the last mentioned offences are non-cognizable but no permission has been sought for challaning this case. Additionally, he argued that on 9-12-2001 statement of one Muhammad Anwar, the Director of the Goods Transport Company was recorded wherein he disclosed that the goods/films were actually delivered to unknown persons on 9-12-2001 which version is in absolute contradiction with what has been recorded in the F.I.R. stating that the goods had been delivered on 13-11-2001 that is to say about four weeks back. Learned' counsel, therefore, submitted that the guilt of present applicant would essentially call for further inquiry. Ms. Masooda Siraj, learned State Counsel opposed the bail on the ground that at least first recovery of a huge quantity of films was made on pointation of the applicant. The points raised by learned counsel for applicant fully support the bail plea as the case did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and on the strength of the contents of affidavit as also the version of Muhammad Anwar the case would, ex-facie, require further inquiry. The bail plea is accordingly accepted and the application is allowed. The applicant be released on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.100,000 and executing P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./G-29/K Bail granted.