2003 S C M R 426

2003 S C M R 426

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Munir A. Sheikh, KhalilurRehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ

TAHIR ABBAS Petitioner

versus

THE STATERespondent

Criminal Petition No. 184L of 2002, decided on 1st April, 2002.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

-S. 497Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.392/395/412Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)BailComplainant 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 otherNo explanation in this regard was availableCase of accused, therefore, was of further inquiryPetition 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, AdvocateonRecord for Petitioner.

Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Date of hearing: 1st April, 2002.

ORDER

MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J. Through F. I. R. No. 147.dated 3132001 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 1742001 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 1112002 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.

N.H.Q./T30/S          

Bail granted.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

P L D 2016 Supreme Court 358

P L D 2016 Supreme Court 358 Present: Mian Saqib Nisar, Iqbal Hameedur Rehman and Tariq Parvez, JJ Sahabzadi MAHARUNISA and another---Appellants/Petitioners Versus Mst. GHULAM SUGHRAN and another---Respondents Civil Appeals Nos. 1176 and 1177 of 2015, and Civil Petition No.1428-L of 2015.           (Against the order dated 11-6-2015 of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench passed in C.M. Nos. 385, 388/2009 and 2051 of 2015) (a) Words and phrases --- ----"Merge" and "merger"---Definitions.             Chambers English Dictionary 7th Edn.; Oxford English Dictionary (1933); Corpus Juris Secoundum (1936) and The Constitution of India by Prof. S.R.Bhansali ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) --- ----S.12(2)---Application under S.12(2), C.P.C, filing of---Forum---"Court which passed the final judgment, decree or order"---Principles---For all legal purposes, it was the final decree/order of the last Court in ...
Read more

P L D 2009 Lahore 362

P L D 2009 Lahore 362 Before Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Tariq Shamim and M.A. Zafar, JJ GHULAM MURTAZA and another---Appellants Versus THE STATE---Respondent Criminal Appeal No.284-J of 2008, decided on 27th March, 2009. (a) Administration of justice--- ----Principles---Quintessence of the Civilization's evolution and growth in the legal field is a progression from dispensation of justice according to the principle of "justice, equity and good conscience" to "justice according to law"---Rationale or raison d'etre for this momentum, quite easy to discern and comprehend, is that justice ought not to be administered according to whims, caprice or subjective standards of an individual judge but it should be dispensed according to some codified or stipulated standards so as to render the outcome consistent and reasonably predictable---Predictability of judicial response to an action or inaction of a person is important because, by and large, people livi...
Read more

2010 SCMR 1181, Supreme Court Allowed Superdari

2010 SCMR 1181 [Supreme Court of Pakistan] Present: Nasir-ul-Mulk, Raja Fayyaz Ahmad and Jawwad S. Khawaja, JJ ALLAH DITTA----Petitioner Versus THE STATE----Respondent Criminal Petition No.461 of 2009, decided on 12th February, 2010. (On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court Lahore dated 3-6-2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No.674 of 2009). (a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 74, Proviso---`Any private individual'---Meaning and scope ---Phrase "any private individual" is to be read ejusdem generis with the preceding specific words, "accused, or his associate or relative' ---By application of the rule the "private individual" mentioned in the proviso refers to such an `individual who has some nexus with the offender or the offence-I-Innocent owner of the vehicle used in the commission of the crime having no nexus whatsoever, either with the accused or the crime, would not fall within the scope of the ph...
Read more