Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: HADAYATULLAH VS Respondent: ABDUL HAMEED AND ANOTHER
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Zaffar Hussain Mirza, Shafi-ur-Rehman Title: HADAYATULLAH vs ABDUL HAMEED AND ANOTHER Case No.: Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 60-R of 1981 Date of Judgment:1983-11-21 Reported As: 1984 SCMR 119 Result: Bail confirmed
Judgment ORDER ' ZAFFAR. HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.-A report was lodged against the petitioner by Abdul Hameed on 1-10- 1980 at Police Station Dabgari, Peshawar, under section 379, P.P.C./section 9 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 for having allegedly stolen an Iron Bar fixed in a lane by the Municipal Corporation, Peshawar. The petitioner was admitted to bail before his arrest which was confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar vide his order dated 4- 11-1980 on the ground that it was a case for further inquiry "as to wrether the accused had actually removed the bar or it has been removed by some other persons". On complainant's application, however, the learned Chief Justice of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, by his order dated 9-9- 1981 the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled. 2. In the aforesaid circumstances the petitioner moved this Court for leave to appeal and, on 14-4- 1981 this Court granted him interim bail. It was ordered that the main petition be laid before the Court for disposal. Today we have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Advocate-General on behalf of the State. It is concede before us by the learned Assistant Advocate-General that there is som delay in the lodging of the F.I.R. And the only eye- witness in support of the main charge is Lalai who seems to have stated that he had removed the iron bar in question at the instance of the petitioner. In these circumstances it seems to us that the guilt of the petitioner require to be furthe inquiry at the trial to fix the criminal responsibility on him. He is, there fore, entitled to remain on bail. 3. We, therefore, convert this petition into appeal and confirmed the bail in the terms already granted to him by this Court.