2005 PLP 527 (YLR)
IFTIKHAR alias BODI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 527 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, J |
| Parties | IFTIKHAR alias BODI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 527 (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 527 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Iftikhar Hussain, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 527 (YLR) (IFTIKHAR alias BODI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Saeed Hassan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.392/411‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Further inquiry‑‑‑Accused was not named in F.I.R., but his name for the first time had appeared in supplementary statement of complainant recorded after about five months of alleged incident‑‑‑Accused had never been put to any identification test‑‑‑Question of evidentiary value of such belated supplementary statement of complainant was open to serious consideration‑‑‑No other evidence was available against accused on police record regarding commission of dacoity‑‑‑Was yet to be seen whether accused could ultimately be held liable for offence under S.392, P.P.C‑‑ Case against accused in circumstances, fell within the purview of subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr. P. C. calling for further inquiry into his guilt‑‑‑Allegedly an amount of Rs.5000 and four gold Kantay had been recovered from accused which attracted offence under S. 411, P. P. C which did not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr. P. C. ‑‑‑Accused was behind the bars for the last about 9 months and he had not been shown previously involved in any case‑‑ Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Malik Muhammad Akbar Awan for the State. Muhammad Ayyub, S.‑I. with Police Record.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner Iftikhar alias Bodi through the instant petition has sought for post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 549 dated 27‑9‑2003 under sections 392/411, P.P.C. registered whir Police Station, Batala Colony, District Faisalabad.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. is that on the night between 26/27‑9‑2003 at about 1‑30 a.m. the complainant was going to his house in his car. All of a sudden, two unknown persons on Honda 125 CC motorcycle came in front of his car. One of them took out pistol and made fire on the side mirror of the car. The same broke the glass and hit the dash board. He snatched the handbag from him due to which his right arm was injured. They fled away with the bag. The bag contained pure gold weighing 1019 grams and gold ornaments in the shape of Mala, Kantay, Balian weighing 950 grams worth Rs.14,56,432 and cash amount of Rs.23,000.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it has appeared that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. He has never been put to any identification test. His name for the first time has appeared in the supplementary statement of the complainant recorded on 1‑2‑2004 as one of the persons, who have committed the said act. It thus was after about 5 months of the alleged incident. The question of evidentiary value of such belated supplementary statement of the complainant is open to serious consideration.
4. Admittedly, there is no other evidence against him on the police record regarding the commission of dacoity. It is, therefore, yet to be seen that he if can ultimately be held liable for the offence under section 392, P.P.C. The case against him is therefore, covered within the purview of subsection (2) of section
497. Cr.P.C. calling for further inquiry into his guilt.
5. Allegedly an amount of Rs.5,000 and four gold Kantay have been recovered from him. It attracts maximum an offence under section 411, P.P.C., which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
6. He is statedly behind the bars for the last about 9 months.
7. Learned State counsel on query has not been able to show that if previously he has been involved in any case:
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has submitted that he has neither been involved in any other case nor previously convicted person.
9. In these circumstances, I find that case for his enlargement on bail has been made out.
10. The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./I‑74/L Bail granted.