2011 SCMR 1533 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AZEEM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2011 SCMR 1533 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AZEEM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 SCMR 1533 (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 2011 SCMR 1533 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 SCMR 1533 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AZEEM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Pir S.A. Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Mian Shah Abbas, Advocate Supreme Court and A.H. Masood, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 6th June, 2011.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 14-3-2011 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 2281-B/2011/09).
S. 497(2)-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 420/467/468/471
Bail, grant of--Case of further inquiry
Civil suit, pendency of
Complainant filed a civil suit two months prior to registration of case regarding same subject matter
No allegation of forgery and nothing was to be recovered from accused
Offences under Ss. 420 and 471, P.P.C. were bailable whereas Ss. 467 and 468, P.P.C. pertained to forgery, which issue required further inquiry so far as guilt of accused was concerned
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No. 820, under sections 420/467/468/471, P.P.C. at Police Station Rail Bazar, Faisalabad on 6-12-2010.
2. The prosecution story briefly stated is that petitioner while acting as a general attorney, sold the land, subject matter of the F.I.R. vide the agreement dated 10-8-2007 to the complainant but subsequently he sold the same land to Ghulam Farid and Muhammad Saleem.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks bail on the ground that even as per the prosecution story given in the F.I.R., there is no allegation of forgery; that the dispute is primarily civil in nature and that is why the complainant in the first instance tiled a civil suit on 3-9-2010 with regard to the same subject matter and notwithstanding the pendency of the civil suit, lie brought the dispute in criminal domain by getting the afore-referred case registered. Adds that he is behind the bars ever since his arrest on 8-1-2011 and not a single witness has been recorded so far.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant and learned Law Officer opposed the petition by submitting that petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R.; that he committed fraud; that though there is no forgery yet his conduct and his past do not make out a case for bail.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Law Officer at some length, we find that admittedly the complainant filed a civil suit two months prior to the registration of the instant case qua the same subject matter. There is no allegation of forgery and nothing has to be recovered from the petitioner. Sections 420 and 471, P.P.C. are bailable whereas sections 467 and 468 pertains to forgery, which issue would require further inquiry so far as petitioner's guilt is concerned. In the afore-referred circumstances, petitioner has made out a case for bail. Consequently, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed and subject to petitioner's furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs. 200,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, he is directed to be released on bail. Crl. M. A. No. 154-L/2011
6. Subject to all just exceptions and for reasons given in the application, this is allowed. M.H./M-49/SC Bail allowed.