A temporary review of records available from the Section 497 (2) Sindh Public Property (Elimination of Extensions) Act (XVIII of 2010), Section 8 Examination Bail, Grant of Further Investigation shows that the names of the accused are not mentioned in the FIR. , And had no role assigned to the accused. No abusive material was recovered from the suspect, nor was he prosecuted. No independent witnesses were available for the alleged crime, the accused was arrested under false pretrial identification, revealing that the defendant's trial was already pending. The land, which was leased out and rented several years ago, was also surveyed several times by government officials, suggesting that possession of the suspect was less than the area on which they were leased. , Was ambiguous and no specific allegation of infringement was raised by the complainant merely through some alleged breach of the allotment terms / lease, highlighting section 8 of the Sindh Public Property Act, 2010 The prosecution's story looks suspicious, in the circumstances, it could not be released from doubt and further investigation is needed in this case. Oh. While the minimum punishment provided under Section 8 (1) of the Sindh Public Property Act 2010 was a one-year guarantee, it cannot be stopped as a punishment, while the sanction of bail in criminal offenses is a rule. And there was no law denying the exception. Will be raised in favor of the prosecution The accused filed a case for sanction of bail, he was admitted in bail, under the circumstances
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
