Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2838 2021 SLD 2838 2021 PLJ 184
Lahore High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 69327-B of 2019, decision Dated: 3.12.2019.
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.
M/s. Muhammad Mushtaq Ahamd Dhoon and Naila Mushtaq Dhoon, Advocates with Petitioner. Mian Muhammad Awais Mazhar, Deputy Prosecutor General for State.

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN

VS

STATE ETC.

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 498

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 379

Criminal Procedure Code 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 379--Pre-arrest bail, grant of--Allegation of theft of wheats/Sarson Crop--Involvement of meager amount i.e. Rs. 50,000/- only--Unseen occurrence, beside the delay of three months in lodging crime report--Merits of the case--Held: It is a settle principle of law that the Court can even look into and evaluate the mala fides from the facts and circumstances of the case which apparently is oozing in this case from the facts and circumstances--Court while deciding the pre-arrest bail can touch upon the merits of the case--Bail petition accepted. PLD 1998 SC 97, 2005 SCMR 784 ref. ORDER Apprehending his arrest at the hands of police, through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks his pre-iirrcst bail in case FIR No. 302, dated 22.08.2019, offence under Section 379., PPC. registered with Police Station. Saddar, Toba Teh Singh. 2. Allegation against the petitioner, in brief as per contents of the crime report is that on 28.05.2019, he committed theft of wheat/sarson crop valuing Rs. 50,000/- belonging to the complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been roped in the instant case against the actual facts and circumstances. It is argued that there is delay of three months in lodging the crime report for which no plausible explanation has been rendered by the prosecution. It is contended that the story contained in the crime report is against the facts. It is argued that it is an unseen occurrence. Learned counsel submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is against the facts. Such circumstances, it is contended make the case against the petitioner to be one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Adds that the offence alleged against the petitioner does not attract the prohibition contained in Section 497(1), Cr.P.C. In such circumstances it is argued that the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for by means of instant petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Law Officer has Opposed this petition. It is argued that the petitioner is named in the crime…
🔒
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