PCRLJ 1999

1999 P Cr (PLP)

Dr. MUHAMMAD USMAN FARUQUI‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Bail Application No. 667 of 1998, decided on 21st December, 1998.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Roshan Essani, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1999 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Muhammad Roshan Essani, J
Parties Dr. MUHAMMAD USMAN FARUQUI‑‑‑Applicant 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 1999 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 1999 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Roshan Essani, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 P Cr (PLP) (Dr. MUHAMMAD USMAN FARUQUI‑‑‑Applicant 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

  • I.A. Hashmi for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.420‑‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused was not only a heart patient but also suffered from Diabetics Mellitus, adjustment disorder and depression‑‑ Accused required constant treatment by a Cardiac Surgeon, Physician and Psychiatrist and rehabilitation under the supervision of various specialists, which facilities according to Chief Medical Officer of Central Prison concerned were not available in jail‑‑‑Case against accused had not proceeded so far and even final challan had not been submitted in Trial Court‑‑‑Question whether the amounts and properties not declared by accused in Annual Declaration of Assets Forms belonged to him or his other family members or relations by inheritance etc. required further inquiry as contemplated under S.497(2), Cr.P.C.‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Malik Muhammad Yousafullah Khan v. The State and another PLD 1995 SC 58; Munawar Din v. Gul Zaman 1978 PCr.LJ 64; Abdul Hai Siddiqui and 2 others v. The State 1993 PCr.LJ 446; Muhammad Sarfraz and 3 others v. The State 1976 SCMR 178; State through Advocate‑General, Sindh v. Qazi Pervez Iqbal and others PLD 1978 SC 64; Criminal Bail Application No.547 of 1997 in Ehtesab Reference No. 16 of 1997, M.A. No. 19 of 1998, Criminal Bail Application No.356 of 1998; Haji Mir Aftab v. The State 1979 SCMR 320 and Muhammad Bashir v. The State 1991 PCr.LJ 2422 ref. Syed Mamoon Hasan, Deputy Attorney‑General for the State.

Judgment & Decree

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

8. The list filed in support of bail plea shows that barring the present case the applicant/accused was granted bail in following seven cases by this Court as well as by the trial Court:‑‑ (1) F.I.R. No.2 of 1997, F.I.A. S.B.C., Bail has been granted by Honourable Karachi High Court vide order passed in Bail Application No.547 of 1997, dated 27‑4‑1998. (2) Ehtesab Reference No. 16 of 1997 Bail has been granted by the Ehtesab Bench at Karachi. Order passed by Mr. justice Dr. Ghous Muhammad.Order dated 6‑4‑1998. (3) F. I. R. No.4 of 1998, F.I.A. S.I.U., Islamabad. Bail granted in the sum of Rs.5,00,000 in Bail Application No.657 of 1998. (4) F.I.R. No.19 of 1996 F.I.A. S.B.C., Karachi Bail has been granted by the learned Special Judge Central‑II, Karachi, in the sum of Rs.5,00,000. (5) F.I.R. No.21 of 1996 F.I.A. S.B.C., Karachi Bail has been granted by the Special Judge Central‑II, Karachi in the sum of Rs.5,00,000. (6) F.I.R. No.2 of 1996 F.I.A. S.B.C., Karachi Bail has been granted by Special Judge Central‑II, Karachi in the sum of Rs.5,00,000. (7) F.I.R. No.13 of 1997 F.I.A. S.B.C., Karachi Bail has been granted by the Honourable High Court vide Criminal Bail Application No.356 of 1998 in the sum of Rs.10,00,000.

9. Apart from that various medical certificates issued by Agha Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Institute of Clinical Opthamology and Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, placed on record show that the applicant is suffering from class 3 angina with occasional nocturnal and chest pain. He had undergone coronary bypass surgery which was got complicated by sternum wound infection. He has an inguinal hernia. The opthamology test shows that he is a patient of glaucoma and his right eyesight has reduced to 6/12 and the left is 6/6. He has also cervical spine problem. There is moderately severe central disc herniation at C4/5 which is causing‑pressure on the thecalsac and pressure on the spinal cord. There is diffuse disc herniation at C5/6 which is causing pressure on the thecal sac and pressure on the spinal cord. There is also mild disc herniation at C3/4 with pressure on the thecal sac. His cardiac rehabilitation has been hampered due to his detention in jail as undertrial prisoner.

10. The letter of Chief Medical Officer, Central Prison, Karachi, shows that applicant/accused is not only heart patient but is a patient of diabeties mellitus and he is also a case of adjustment disorder and depression: He requires constant treatment by a cardiac surgeon, physician and psychiatrist and rehabilitation under the supervision of various specialists. According to him, facilities for such supervision are not available in jail.

11. Now, I will advert to another aspect of the matter. The case has not proceeded so far and even final challan has not been submitted before the trial Court. The amount and properties not declared in Annual Declaration of Assets Forms, The question whether these amounts and properties belong to applicant/accused or to his other family members by inheritance etc. or other relations requires further enquiry as contemplated under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. This fact coupled with the fact of sickness entitles the applicant/accused to bail. In this context I am fortified by the decisions of this Court in respect of applicant/accused vide Criminal Bail Application No.547 of 1997 in Ehtesab Reference No. 16 of 1997, M.A. No. 19 of 1998, Criminal Bail Application No.356 of 1998 and also reported decisions in the cases of Haji Mir Aftab v. The State 1979 SCMR 320, Muhammad Bashir v. The State 1991 PCr.LJ 2422 and Malik Muhammad Yousafullah Khan v. The State PLD 1995 SC 58.

12. The upshot of the above discussion is that the bail plea of applicant/accused merits consideration. Consequently, applicant/accused is granted bail in the sum of Rs.20,00,000 (two million) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Nazir of this Court. N.H.Q./M‑396/K Bail allowed.