Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 2082 2019 SLD 2082 2019 PLJ 908
Lahore High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 7681-B of 2018, decision & hearing Dated: 19.03.2019
SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Ch. Umar Hayyat, Advocate
Respondent(s) by: Mr. Hassan Mahmood Khan Tareen, DPG Mr. Hasnain Abbas, Advocate

KHUDA BUKSH

VS

STATE ETC.

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 161,498

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 380

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 380--Pre-arrest bail--Confirmed--Allegation of--Committed robbery and taken away animals belonging to complainant--Delay in lodging FIR about one month without any plausible explanation--Recovery of--It is admitted position of law that for purpose of recovery, it is not necessary that petitioners be sent behind bars and same purpose can be achieved by obtaining a search warrant by Investigating Officer--Additionally, during investigation of case, no recovery was effected from petitioners during whole of that period--Investigation of case is complete and Investigating Officer has also verified version of complainant as well as petitioners hence, sending petitioners behind bars at this stage, would cause irreparable loss to their reputation--Bail was allowed. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, JUSTICE---.--- By way of this single order, I intend to dispose of Crl. Misc. No. 7681-B of 2018 filed by Khuda Buksh and Crl. Misc. No. 1520-B of 2019 filed by Husnain Mahmood, arising out of the same FIR. 2. The petitioners in both the petitions mentioned above, are seeking their pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 427 of 2018, dated 16.10.2018 registered at Police Station Kot Mithan, District Rajanpur in respect of an offence under section 380, PPC. 3. The allegation as against the petitioners, as culled from the evidentiary material produced before the Court, is that they committed theft in the house of complainant depriving her of three goats and one sheep. 4. Arguments heard. Record perused. 5. At the very out-set, it is discernable from the perusal of the FIR, that there is delay in lodging the same of about a month. The explanation as offered by the complainant for such delay is bereft and also unbelievable as to why, she, knowing that the petitioners were actual thieves, believed their word and did not report the matter to the police for such a long period. Despite there being delay, the evidentiary material is also deficient with respect to the proof against the petitioners. Though, it is recorded in the FIR that both the petitioners admitted their theft and also…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492