Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497 , 457/380 , 9 411

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ---S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.457/380 &9 411---Bail---Recovery allegedly effected from accused was of the value of Rs.10,000 only as at present at best it was a case under S.411, P.P.C. an offence punishable for only three years- Delay of 20 days in lodging F.I.R. was coupled with the fact that there were no witnesses of occurrence---Person alleged to have received stolen goods had not been arrested so far although he was mentioned in F.I.R.---Accused was also no longer required by Police---Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. 1978 PCrLJ 284; 1982 PCr.LJ 792; 1986 PCr.LJ 2854 and 1988 P.CrLJ 1593 distinguished. Malik M.H. Misson for Petitioner. Malik Ghulam Fareed for the Complainant. Qazi Muhammad Mukhtar for the State. ORDER The brief facts of the bail application are that F.I.R. No.192/88, dated 19-9-1988 was registered at P.S. Cantt. Bahawalpur by Arif Iqbal, complainant under section 457/380, P.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that: F.I.R. was lodged after a delay of 20 days. That there are no eye-witnesses of the occurrence. That no case is made out against the petitioner under the provisions of section 457/380, P.P.C. That there is no evidence of petitioner having broken into the house or committed trespass or stolen the alleged goods. That though it has been alleged that there were footprints at the place of occurrence it has not been alleged any where that one of those was of the petitioner, nor any professional Foot Tracker's evidence had been "' brought in to establish the same. That the recovery effected from the accused is only of the value of Rs.10,000 and thus the case is covered by section 411, P.P.C. and does not fall under section 457/380,   P.P.C. and therefore, is not hit by the prohibitory clause. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to bail. That the petitioner is 50 years old and has no previous conviction or criminal record. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to 1978 P Cr. LJ 284. The authority cited by the learned counsel pertains to an offence under section 411, P.P.C. and not under section 457/380, P.P.C. He also referred to 1982…