2005 PLP 1061 (MLD)
Mian NOOR AHMAD and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1061 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Jahangir, J |
| Parties | Mian NOOR AHMAD 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 1061 (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 2005 PLP 1061 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Jahangir, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1061 (MLD) (Mian NOOR AHMAD and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Yaqub Pannu for Petitioner (in Crl. Misc No.3475‑B of 2003).
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420/468/471/218/409‑‑‑Bail, refusal of‑‑‑Opinion of Investigating Officer regarding innocence of accused though not binding on the Court yet might be taken into consideration if based upon any sound material‑‑‑Had there been any truth in the claim of innocence by accused, they could not be named in the F.I.R. ‑‑‑Accused had allegedly misappropriated huge public money from the Head of Marriage Grant by preparing bogus documents and so long as the same was not paid even under protest, the bail matter would not be taken into consideration‑‑‑Public money was yet to be recovered from the accused‑‑‑Bail was declined to accused in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Jameel Gujjar for the Petitioners (in Crl. Misc. Nos.3423‑B and 3424‑B of 2003). Muhammad Farooq Rashid for the State (in Crl. Misc Nos.3423‑B and 3424‑B of 2003). Tariq Sohail for the State (in Crl. Misc. 3475‑B of 2003) Ehsan ul Haq A.S.‑I. and Shafqat S.‑I.
Judgment & Decree
Tariq Sohail for the State (in Crl. Misc. 3475‑B of 2003) Ehsan ul Haq A.S.‑I. and Shafqat S.‑I. Heard.
2. By this order post‑arrest bail petitions moved by Muhammad Abbas Ahsan son of Mian Hassan Ali, Caste Mughal, resident of Canada Colony, Nankana Sahib, District Sheikhupura, and Mian Noor Ahmad son of Muhammad Bux, caste Nanghi, resident of Chak No.26‑RB, Tehsil Safdarabad, District Sheikhupura, petitioners, in the cases bearing F. I. R. No. 14 dated 13‑3‑2003, registered under sections 420, 468, 471, 218 and 409, P.P.C. with Police Station City 'B' Division Sheikhupura and F.I.R. No.6 dated 20‑1‑2003 under sections 420, 468, 471, 218, 409, P.P.C. registered with Police Station Safdarabad District Sheikhupura, are being disposed of together as almost the facts and circumstances are the same.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they mis appropriated the huge public money from the head of marriage grant by preparing bogus documents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners mainly argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and during investigation both were found innocent and that the petitioners never remained involved in any such case. On the other hand learned State counsel opposed these petitions for bail and submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and that the offence is serious in nature, therefore, it is not a fit case for bail.
5. It is obvious that the opinion of the Investigating Police is not binding on the Court and it may be taken into consideration if it is based upon any sound material. Had there been any truth in the fact of innocence the petitioners could not be named in the F.I.R., the public exchequer is yet to be recovered, therefore, it is an exceptional case and so long as the public money is not paid even under protest, the bail matter would not be taken into consideration. These petitions being without merits are hereby dismissed. N.H.Q./N‑13/L Bail refused.