2001 PLP 786 (MLD)
SIKANDER ALI ‑‑‑ Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2001 PLP 786 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Soomro, J |
| Parties | SIKANDER ALI ‑‑‑ Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 786 (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 2001 PLP 786 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Soomro, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 786 (MLD) (SIKANDER ALI ‑‑‑ Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 452‑‑‑Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S. 17(3)‑‑‑West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13‑D‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Name of accused did not appear in the F. I. R. and no evidence was forthcoming against him‑‑ Accused was not implicated by the eye‑witnesses who were examined during the trial‑‑‑No other evidence by way of judicial or extra‑judicial confession was available against the accused‑‑ ‑All that which was against the accused was the factum of his abscondence which alone could not disentitle him to grant of bail‑‑‑Accused was granted bail in circumstances. Muhammad Saleem G. N. Jessar for Applicant. Altaf Hussain Surahio for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Saleem G. N. Jessar for Applicant. Altaf Hussain Surahio for the State. By this order I propose to dispose of Criminal Bail Application No.492 of 2000, in a case bearing crime F1.R.. No. 125 of 1994, Police Station Market, under sections 17/3, Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, 452, P.P.C. read with section 13, D.A.O. 1965. Applicant's bail plea was dismissed by the learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana vide order dated 11‑9‑2000. The brief history of prosecution case unfolded in F.I.R. shows that complainant Kaukab Habib Memon appeared at Police Station Market and lodged a report against 3 unidentified persons. Following the investigation Umed Ali and Ali Hassan were arrested and they were sent up to stand trial in the Court of learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana. During the course of trial accused Umed Ali Sheikh and Ali Hassan Mirhabar were granted bail vide order dated 6‑2‑1996 but thereafter accused Umed Ali jumped out of bail and was declared as an absconder. The case proceeded against accused Ali Hassan and he was acquitted vide judgment dated 25‑4‑2000. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested on 10‑8‑2000 a6d after usual investigation he was sent up to stand trial in the Court of learned Vith Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties 'and perused the record. It has, been argued that there is absolutely no evidence against the present applicant inasmuch as his mine does not appear in the F.I.R., he has not been implicated by the eye‑witnesses namely complainant Kaukab Habib and Ghulam Murtaza who were examined during' the trial of accused Ali‑ Hassan. He further submits that there is no other evidence by way of judicial or extra judicial confession. All that which goes against the applicant is the factum of absconsion which alone could not disentitle the applicant for grant of bail to him. Learned counsel for the State concedes to the above legal position and raised no objection for the grant of bail. Looking to the above background, I grant bail to the applicant Sikander Ali Shaikh in the sum of Rs.100,000 (one lac) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./S‑78/K Bail granted.