Pakistan Case Law
2010 YLR 2685

ABDUL GHAFFAR Versus State

โญ Prefer in Google
Citation2010 YLR 2685
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14421/B of 2009
Date2009-11-19
Judge(s)Khawaja Muhammad Sahrif, C.J. ABDUL GHAFFAR--
Authored byKhawaja Muhammad Sharif
ResultBail granted

ORDER

KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, C.J.--- It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner along with two brothers has been falsely implicated in this case; that in fact there was an agreement between the petitioner and the ' complainant; that no offence as mentioned in the F.I.R. has been committed by the petitioner; that petitioner was arrested on 4-9-2009; that he was on physical remand for 12 days and only a cheque was recovered; that no cash amount was recovered from him; that as far as two other cases of dacoity against the petitioner is concerned, in both the cases learned counsel for the petitioner states at Bar that he has been discharged and that case of petitioner is of further inquiry falling under sub-clause 2 of section 497, Cr.P.C.

2. On the other hand learned D.P.-G. assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submits that he is named in the F.I.R.; that his two brothers are behind the bars; that he was taken into custody from jail where he was confined in an other cases of robbery which were taken place prior to this occurrence; that cheque of Rs.300,000 was given by the petitioner which was bounced; that he is desperate criminal and bail petition should be dismissed.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner remained on physical remand for 12 days and only cheque was recovered from him which according to learned counsel for the complainant has been bounced. A separate case under section 489-F, P.P.C. can be registered against him by the complainant. As far as two other cases of robbery prior to this occurrence are concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner states at Bar that in both the cases he has been discharged. In case statement of learned counsel for the petitioner is found to be false, the complainant can move for cancellation of bail. As far as present case is concerned, no useful purpose can be served to detain him further in jail. In this view of the matter, case of petitioner is of further inquiry falling under sub-clause 2 of sec tion 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is accepted and petitioner is allowed bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000 (one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy' Registrar (J) of this Court.

H.B.T./A-47/L Bail granted.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.