P L D 2008 Karachi 204 (PLP)
NASRULLH SHARIF — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 2008 Karachi 204 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NASRULLH SHARIF — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2008 Karachi 204 (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 P L D 2008 Karachi 204 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2008 Karachi 204 (PLP) (NASRULLH SHARIF — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.409, 420, 468 & 471/34
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)
Co-accused being public servants had been granted bail and some of them had been acquitted
Name of accused had not been mentioned in the F.I.R.
Accused was also entitled to grant of bail as a rule of consistency.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO, C J.
Applicant-Nasrullah Sharif was granted interim bail before arrest on 12-9-2006 in F.I.R. No.40 of 2001 under sections 409/420/468/471/34, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) ACT-II, 1947 of Police Station ACE Karachi. Today this case has come up for confirmation or otherwise. The applicant is involved in this case which pertains to allotment of plots by the office bearers of Messrs Callachi Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. to their favourites. Learned counsel for the applicant contended. that name of the applicant has not been mentioned in the F.I.R; that some of the co-accused have been granted bail and some of them, have been acquitted; that even in the interim charge-sheet name of the applicant was not mentioned and only in the final challan with mala fide of the complainant his name was mentioned; that the applicant is a heart patient and has undergone bypass operation. Learned counsel has relied upon the case of Sikandar A. Karim v. State 1995 SCMR 387 and contended that accused who is a non-public servant cannot be convicted under section 5(2). This would be a ground for his enlargement on bail under section 497/498, Cr.P.C. He further contended that the accused would be entitled to bail on rule of consistency when accused who are public servants have been granted bail. Learned counsel for the State is unable to controvert the above position. Since co-accused being public servants have been granted bail and some of them have been acquitted; no name of the applicant having been mentioned, the applicant is also entitled to the same treatment as a rule of consistency. Looking all the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to the same relief and thus confirm the interim bail before arrest granted to him on the same terms. H.B.T./N-53/K Bail confirmed.