2005 PLP 647 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 647 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Najam‑uz‑Zaman, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 647 (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 2005 PLP 647 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Najam‑uz‑Zaman, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 647 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nadeem Mehmood Mian for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss.17/22‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Further inquiry‑‑‑One of prosecution witnesses in his statement made under S.164, Cr. P. C. had exonerated accused‑‑ Case against accused fell within fold of further inquiry entitling him to concession of bail‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Crl. Miscellaneous No.8420‑B of decided on 3rd December, 2004. ‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss.17/22‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Further inquiry‑‑‑One of prosecution witnesses in his statement made under S.164, Cr. P. C. had exonerated accused‑‑ Case against accused fell within fold of further inquiry entitling him to concession of bail‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Nadeem Mehmood Mian for Petitioner. This is second application for the grant of post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.316 dated 3‑4‑2004 for the offences under sections 17/22 of Emigration Ordinance, 1979 registered at Police Station F.I.A., Passport Circle, Lahore. The first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 24‑6‑2004. This second application has been filed on the ground that one of the prosecution witnesses namely Rehmat Ali son of Muhammad Ali has made a statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. stating therein that petitioner never received any amount or the travelling documents from the complainant as alleged in the F.I.R., in his presence (photo copy of the statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. has been placed on the record).
2. Neither the counsel for F.I.A. Authorities is in attendance nor the record of the case has been produced by the agency.
3. Be that as it may, in the light of the statement made by Rehmat Ali (prosecution witness) exonerating the petitioner, prima facie the case against the petitioner falls within the fold of further inquiry entitling him to the concession of bail. Accordingly this petition is allowed, petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./M‑780/L Bail granted.