2007 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHRAF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ASHRAF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tahir Naeem for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Correct name of accused had not been mentioned in F.I.R. which was brought on record through a supplementary statement, though on same day, but no source of information had been mentioned
Accused remained on physical remand for nine days and no recovery was effected from him
Accused having made out case of further inquiry falling under S.497(2), Cr.P.C., he was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of this bail petition contends that the petitioner has falsely been involved in this ease; that there is a delay of 16 hours in lodging the F.I.R., petitioner was not named no recovery was effected; that the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry and that the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner was named in the F.I.R., his name was corrected on the same day through a supplementary statement but admitted that no recovery was effected from him.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, have given consideration to the submissions made at the bar and have also gone through the record.
4. Correct name of the petitioner has not been mentioned in the F.I.R. which was brought on record through a supplementary statement although on the same day but no source of information has been mentioned. Although he remained on physical remand for nine days yet no recovery was effected from him. In the afore-referred circumstances, this Court is of the prima facie view that the petitioner has made out a case falling under subsection (2) to section 497, Cr.P.C. and is entitled to the concession of bail. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. H.B.T./M-555/L Bail granted.