Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: NISAR VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Ghulam RabbaniZulfiqar Ali Sangi
2008 M L D 926
2008 M L D 926
[Karachi]
Before Ghulam Rabbani, J
NISAR-Applicant
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No.375 of 2004, decided on 3rd September, 2004.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324 & 337-F(ii)/34---West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13(d)---Bail, grant of---Accused was not named in the F.I.R. and was in custody since long---Co-accused who was nominated in the F.I.R. had already been granted bail vide order passed by the Trial Court---No proceedings under S.87 or 88, Cr.P.C. had been taken against the accused---State Counsel had stated that accused could be released on bail considering the rule of consistency---Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Rab Nawaz v. State PLD 1996 Lahore 1240; Nadeem v. State PLD 1996 Kar. 40 and Dosoo v. State 2003 PCr.LJ 933 ref.
Zulfiqar Ali Sangi for Applicant.
Ghulam Sarwar Korai for the State.
ORDER
GHULAM RABBANI, J.---The name of applicant is not stated in the F.I.R. registered for offences under sections 324, 337-F(ii), 34, P.P.C. and 13(d) Arms Ordinance being crime No.2 of 2002 of Police Station Salehpat on 17-1-2002 about the incident which took place on 15-1-2002 at 0130 hours. The allegations against the applicant are that he had subsequently met with the complainant and disclosed to him that he was involved in the commission of offence; as such he was challaned showing him as an absconder in the charge-sheet.
The applicant was arrested on 30-4-2003 and since then he is in custody. Co-accused Muhammad Ashraf who was nominated in the F.I.R. has already been granted bail vide order, dated 19-8-2002 passed by learned trial Court. No proceedings under section 87 or 88 have been taken against the applicant.
Learned State counsel states that the applicant may be released on bail considering the rule of consistency.
Keeping in view the case of Rab Nawaz v. State (PLD 1996 Lahore 1240), the case of Nadeem v. State (PLD 1996 Karachi 40) and the case of Dosoo v. State (2003 PCr.LJ 933), applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
H.B.T./N-10/K??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.