2013 PLP 1751 (YLR)
ZAFAR HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2013 PLP 1751 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J |
| Parties | ZAFAR HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 PLP 1751 (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 2013 PLP 1751 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2013 PLP 1751 (YLR) (ZAFAR HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.395 & 412
Dacoity, lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment
Belated identification parade
No recovery effected
Effect
Accused and co-accused persons allegedly committed dacoity at the house of complainant
Accused was not nominated in F.I.R.
Accused was initially arrested in another case and Investigating Officer submitted application before Magistrate requesting that accused was required in the present F.I.R.
Said application was allowed by Magistrate with a direction to conduct investigation in jail
Identification parade was held with a delay of 22 days
During investigation parade only one person identified the accused
Police did not produce any witness before the Magistrate
No recovery was effected from accused
Challan had already been submitted
Case was one of further inquiry
Accused was admitted to bail accordingly. Tareen v. The State 2005 YLR 184 and Pervaiz and 3 others v. The State 2005 YLR 3236 ref. Abdul Salam Memon for Applicant. Sharfuddin Mangi for the State.
Judgment & Decree
AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.
Applicant seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.119 of 2012 registered under section 395, P.P.C. Police Station Defence South Karachi. Precise allegations as per F.I.R. are that in all six accused identifiable by face entered into house of complainant at midnight time and committed dacoity of gold ornaments, mobile phones and licensed revolver. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated by the prosecution in this case. He submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the applicant/accused. He submits that as per prosecution case photocopies CNICs of Rehmatullah, Sarfraz and Muhammad Tarique were placed before the complainant out of them only Rehmatullah was identified by the complainant. He submits that applicant/ accused was arrested on 18-6-2012 and interim challan submitted by the prosecution 27th July, 2012 after delay of about 22 days. He submits that prosecution has violated section 173, Cr.P.C. He submits that applicant/accused is remanded to judicial custody and he is no more required for further investigation. In support of his contention he placed reliance on case-law reported as Tareen v. The State (2005 YLR 184) and Pervaiz and 3 others v. The State (2005 YLR 3236). Learned A.P.-G. opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is identified by the complainant in identification parade. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned APG and have also perused the record. Applicant is not nominated in F.I.R. He is arrested in Crime No.174 of 2012 Police Station Gizri and he along with co-accused remanded to jail custody on 19-6-2012 but Investigating Officer has failed to produce the applicant for identification test before the Magistrate. On 28-6-2012 he has submitted application before concerned Magistrate that applicant is required in other Crime No.119 of 2012 Police Station Defence, which was allowed by the Magistrate, with direction to conduct investigation inside the jail. Identification parade was held on 4-7-2012 there is delay of about 22 days. Identification parade shows that only one complainant has identified the applicant/accused and co-accused but no any witnesses has been produced by police before Magistrate and before the Magistrate complainant has only stated that he along with other persons has committed robbery. There is no recovery. Challan has been submitted it will not fulfil any useful purpose keeping the applicant behind the bars as punishment. Considering the law referred above and in view of the facts and circumstances the applicant's case is that of further inquiry into his guilt. I, therefore, admit the applicant to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.200,000 (Rupees two lac) with PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. MWA/Z-17/K Bail granted.