2003 PLP 426 (SCMR)
TAHIR ABBAS ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2003 PLP 426 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | TAHIR ABBAS ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 426 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 426 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 426 (SCMR) (TAHIR ABBAS ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Saeed Ensari, Advocate Supreme Court and Walayat Umer, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 1st April, 2002.
- Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑-‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.392/395/412‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Bail‑‑‑Complainant had involved the accused in the case in his supplementary statement and not in the F.I.R., although the accused was living in the same locality at a distance of about few yards and the parties were known to each other‑‑‑No explanation in this regard was available‑‑‑Case of accused, therefore, was of further inquiry‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed in circumstances and the accused was admitted to bail accordingly. Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑-‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.392/395/412‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Bail‑‑‑Complainant had involved the accused in the case in his supplementary statement and not in the F.I.R., although the accused was living in the same locality at a distance of about few yards and the parties were known to each other‑‑‑No explanation in this regard was available‑‑‑Case of accused, therefore, was of further inquiry‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed in circumstances and the accused was admitted to bail accordingly. Muhammad Saeed Ensari, Advocate Supreme Court and Walayat Umer, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Date of hearing: 1st April, 2002. MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J. ‑‑‑Through F. I. R. No. 147.dated 31‑3‑2001 a case was registered at Police Station Allama Iqbal Town under sections 395, 412 and 392, P.P.C. in which the petitioner was not named as an accused person. The complainant however subsequently on 17‑4‑2001 made a supplementary statement in which he involved the petitioner also. The petitioner is living in the same locality at a distance of about few yards and the parties were known to each other therefore, there was no explanation as to why if the petitioner was involved, he was left out when the F.I.R. was got registered as the ground of mistake about the identity of the petitioner prima facie is not available.
2. The case of the petitioner is of further inquiry therefore, this petition is converted into appeal, and the same is allowed, order dated 11‑1‑2002 passed by the High Court impugned in this petition set aside and the petitioner is granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety to the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. Anything said in this order shall not be taken at as a decision on merits of the case for these observations have been made for the purpose of this bail petition and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits on the basis of evidence produced in the case. Bail granted.