1999 P Cr (PLP)
MUNSIB KHAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1999 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUNSIB KHAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 P Cr (PLP) (MUNSIB KHAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S, 497
Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975), Sched.
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13-A
Allegation against accused was that one unlicensed T.T. Pistol loaded with magazine having four live bullets was recovered from him
Neither any number of weapon was mentioned in F.I.R. nor in Mashirnama of recovery-- Weapon, despite being unnumbered, was not sealed
Mashirnama having shown that weapon was Pakistani made merely by describing it a T.T. Pistol would not make it an automatic or semi-automatic weapon
Weapon allegedly recovered from accused neither being automatic- nor semi-automatic, same could not be covered by the Schedule to Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts; Act, 1975
Case against accused being of further enquiry he was granted bail.
Judgment & Decree
KAMAL MANSOOR ALAM, J.
According to the F.I.R. No.85 of 1997, one unlicensed T.T. Pistol loaded with a magazine having four live bullets was recovered from the applicant on 13-3-1997. Neither any number of the weapon as mentioned in the F.I.R. nor in the Mashirnama of recovery. The learned A.A.-G. admits that the weapon in spite of being unnumbered was not sealed. The Mashirnama shows that the weapon is Pakistan made, as such, merely by describing it as a T.T. Pistol would not make it an automatic or semi automatic weapon. As such, for the present there seems no reason to accept that the weapon was automatic or semi-automatic and therefore, to be covered under the Schedule to the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975. We, in these circumstances, consider this to be a case of further inquiry and accordingly allow this application and grant bail to applicant on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) and P.R. Bond in amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.~B.T./M-318/K Bail granted.