PCRLJ 2009

2009 P Cr (PLP)

Syed AZMAT HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Islamabad
Decided Date
2008-November-13
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2009 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Islamabad
Bench Members N/A
Parties Syed AZMAT HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 P Cr (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 2009 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Islamabad bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 P Cr (PLP) (Syed AZMAT HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • M. Tanvir Chaudhry for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 497 & 345

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.377/34

Bail, grant of

Complainant had himself appeared before the court and affirmed the contents of affidavit sworn by him regarding compromise with accused

Case though was not compoundable and did not fall within the ambit of S.345, Cr.P.C., however when the complainant did not want to pursue the matter further and had forgiven accused by entering into compromise outside the court, his statement/affidavit could be considered as one of the relevant factors for grant of relief to accused at bail stage

Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, J.

Petitioner seeks his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.253, dated 20-6-2008 registered under section 377/34, P.P.C., at Police Station Shahzad Town (Islamabad).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and complainant of this case has forgiven the accused/petitioner in the name of Almighty Allah, regarding which he has also submitted an affidavit on record.

3. On the other hand, learned Federal Counsel has opposed this bail petition, on the ground that the offence is not compoundable.

4. I have heard arguments of both sides and perused the record.

5. Today, the complainant has himself appeared before the Court and affirmed the contents of affidavit sworn by him, regarding compromise with the accused/petitioner. Although the case is not compoundable and does not fall within the ambit of section 345; Cr.P.C., however, when the complainant does not want to pursue the matter further and has forgiven the accused/petitioner by entering into compromise outside the Court, his statement/affidavit can be considered as one of the relevant factor, for grant of relief to the petitioner, at bail stage.

6. Resultantly, this petition is accepted and petitioner is admitted to bail, subject to furnishing bail bond valuing Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./A-65/Isl. Bail granted.