Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 916 2012 SLD 916 2012 YLR 596
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 516/B-2011, decision Dated: 17-05-2011.
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Malik Tahir Mehmood

SHAUKAT ALI

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 498

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 420,467,468,471,506

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420/468/471/506---Cheating, forgery for purpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document and criminal intimidation---Pre-arrest bail, grant of---No date and time of the occurrence had been mentioned in the F.I.R.---None of the offences charged against the accused were, prima facie, attracted to the facts of the case to the extent of accused---Documents in the case pertained to the year 1979---Prosecution had lodged the case after 32 years, which itself was sufficient to grant the relief prayed for---Documentary evidence being in the exclusive possession of the investigating agency, accused if released on bail was not likely to tamper with the same---Not only the accused but his deceased forefathers had also been roped in the case and the complainant had astonishingly kept mum during their life time---Material available on record had manifestly suggested that registration of the case might be the outcome of mala fides---Liberty was the most precious right of every citizen as guaranteed by the Constitution, which could not be curtailed on bald allegations---Ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to accused was confirmed in circumstances. Saeed Ahmed v. The State 1995 SCMR 170 ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.--- Apprehending his arrest at the hands of police, Shaukat Ali petitioner seeks his pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.12, dated 14-1-2011, offence under sections 420, 468, 471, 506, P.P.C., lodged at Police Station Ganjmandi, Rawalpindi. 2. Allegation against the petitioner, in brief, as per contents of the F.I.R. is that he and his forefathers by way of preparing bogus documents of ownership of the plot owned by the complainant had committed fraud. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent, who has been involved in this case by the complainant for satisfying ulterior motives just to humiliate the petitioner and cause unjustified harassment. It is argued that no date and time of occurrence has been mentioned. Learned counsel vehemently contends that not only it is a case in which there is no direct evidence…
🔒
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