2008 PLP 323 (MLD)
MAZHAR HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 323 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MAZHAR HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 323 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 323 (MLD)?
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: 2008 PLP 323 (MLD) (MAZHAR HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Imtiaz Mahi for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal code (XLV of 1860), Ss.452, 506 & 186
Offences with which accused were charged, did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Bail in such cases should be granted as a matter of rule, however, in exceptional circumstances could be refused
No exceptional circumstances were pointed out by the Law Officer
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, J.
Petitioners Mazher Hussain and Azhar Hussain seek post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 282 of 2007, dated 30-5-2007 under sections 186, 452, 506, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Jauharabad District Khushab.
2. Precisely, the allegations levelled against the petitioners as per F.I.R. are that they committed highhandedness by interfering in the official duty of public functionaries i.e. Patwari by entering into their office, while armed with respective weapons, snatched the Government/ public record from Patwari and torn up and also extended threats of murder to the said officials. Hence, this case.
3. It is contended that the present case has been got registered against the petitioners at the instance of Brig. Ahsan, who is relative of the petitioners and civil litigation is going on between the parties in District Khushab. It is further submitted that a false allegation of having destroyed .the official record was levelled against the petitioners, as no such destroyed record was recovered by the police from the place of occurrence; that the offences with which the petitioners are charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. On the other hand, learned DPG has opposed this application. However, he is not in a position to show from the record that any destroyed public record was recovered by the police from the place of occurrence.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.
6. Non-recovery of the public record, which was allegedly destroyed by the petitioners, prima facie speaks volumes about the bona fide of the contents of the F.LR. The offences with which the petitioners are charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Bail in such cases should be granted as a matter of rule, however, in exceptional circumstances can be refused. No exceptional circumstances could be pointed out by the learned Law Officer. This application is accordingly allowed, petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-528/L Bail granted.