2005 PLP 673 (YLR)
SHAUKAT ALI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 673 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rustam Ali Malik, J |
| Parties | SHAUKAT ALI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 673 (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 673 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rustam Ali Malik, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 673 (YLR) (SHAUKAT ALI and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zahid Hussain Khan for Petitioners.
- 4. So far petitioner No. 1 is concerned, the learned counsel for petitioners has stated that he does not want to press the petition to his extent and wants to withdraw the same. Accordingly the petition to the extent of petitioner No. 1 is disposed of as withdrawn.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.395/397/312‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Further inquiry‑‑‑Accused was not specifically named in F.I.R.‑‑‑During course of investigation, a gun .12 bore and a rifle 8 mm had allegedly been recovered, but submission of accused was that said gun and rifle had been planted upon him‑‑ Recovery allegedly had been effected and nothing else was to be recovered from accused and since no identification parade had been held to determine identity of accused, case against him was clearly one of further inquiry‑‑‑Accused, in circumstances was entitled to concession of bail‑‑‑Bail was granted to accused, in circumstances. M. Rafique for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Zahid Hussain Khan for Petitioners. M. Rafique for the State. Petitioners namely Shaukat Ali and Muhammad Akram seek bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.108 of 2002 registered on 9‑6‑2002 in Police Station, Gojra, District Mandi Baha‑ud‑Din, under sections 395, 397 and 312, P.P.C.
2. The F.I.R. was lodged by one Sikandar Hayat regarding an occurrence which had taken place on 9‑6‑2002 around 2‑30 a.m. In the course of occurrence a dacoity had been committed at the Dera of Haji Nazar Muhammad where the complainant was also sleeping on the night of occurrence. The number of culprits was described as 10 who were equipped with fire‑arms and had forcibly taken along a gun .12 bore belonging to Sikandar Hayat, an amount of Rs.20,000 and 3000 Saudi Riyals, ornaments, blankets; irons etc. Tasawwar Abbas and Sikandar Hayat sons of Haji Nazar Muhammad were also injured during the course of occurrence.
3. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
4. So far petitioner No. 1 is concerned, the learned counsel for petitioners has stated that he does not want to press the petition to his extent and wants to withdraw the same. Accordingly the petition to the extent of petitioner No. 1 is disposed of as withdrawn.
5. So far as Muhammad Akram petitioner No.2 is concerned, he is not specifically named in the F.I.R. However, the learned counsel for the State has submitted that during the course of investigation, a gun .12 bore belonging to the complainant and also a rifle .8 MM had been recovered. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said gun and rifle had been planted upon petitioner No.2 so as to falsely implicate him in this case. Anyhow, as the alleged recovery has already been effected and as nothing else is now to be recovered from the petitioner No.2 and since petitioner No.2 is not specifically named in the F.I.R. and since no identification parade had been held to determine the identity of petitioner No.2 as one of the culprits, therefore, his case is clearly of one of further inquiry and he is thus entitled to the concession of bail. Accordingly, the bail application to the extent of petitioner No.2 is accepted and he is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./S‑267/L Bail granted.