Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ABID VS Respondent: THE STATE
1994 P Cr
1994 P Cr. L J 1273
[Lahore]
Before Rashid Aziz Khan, J
MUHAMMAD ABID and others---Petitioners
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4422/B of 1993, decided on 11th January,. 1994,
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.420/467/468/471---Bail, grant of---Thumb-impressions on the disputed power-of-attorney according to the Handwriting Expert's report were forged---Accused on the basis of said power of-attorney had also entered into an agreement to sell the house of the complainant wherein they were beneficiaries---Bail was refused to accused in circumstances.
Rana Nasrullah Khan for Petitioners.
Malik Abdus Sattar Chughtai for the Complainant.
Masood Sadiq Mirza for the State.
ORDER
Petitioners seek bail in a case registered against them and others with Police Station Faisal Town, Lahore, for an offence under section 420/467/ 468/471, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. dated 28-4-1993. The case was got registered by Mussarrat Wahid with the allegation that about 12/13 years earlier she was married with Muhammad Abid Qureshi petitioner. From the said wed-lock a girl and two boys were born who were living with the first informant. The first informant was owner of a house bearing No.198-C/Faisal Town, Lahore, which was given on rent The tenant had defaulted therefore, she got ejectment order. In the meanwhile relations between the spouses became strained therefore, the first informant's daughter started living with her father. She learnt that her husband Muhammad Abid Qureshi petitioner with his brother Muhammad Asif Qureshi and others had prepared a forged power-of-attorney in his favour upon which the first informant and her brother's signatures were forged.
It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the case against them was extremely doubtful. Submitted that he was in custody ever-since the registration of case and was not required for purpose of investigation anymore. Argued that petitioners had purchased the house in the name of his wife and when their relations became strained he wanted to dispose of the property. Submitted that no fraud was committed as alleged. Contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the complainant as well as counsel for the State.
2. I have heard the learned counsel and gone through the file. Police during investigation obtained the signatures/thumb-impression of the first informant as well as of her brother and sent them to the Handwriting Expert for comparison with the questioned power-of-attorney. According to the report of handwriting expert thumb-impressions on the said power-of-attorney are forged. Petitioners on the basis of said power-of-attorney had also entered into an agreement to sell of the same house where the accused persons were beneficiaries. No ground for bail is made out. Petition fails which is dismissed.
N.H.Q./M-1460/L Bail refused.