Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2662/B of 1982, decided on 3rd November, 1982.
----Ss. 497 & 498--Cfmces Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S. 17----Bail--Informant not disclosing pre sence of accused with another outside shop wherein offence committed by main accused---Case of further inquiry-Bail granted.
Muhammad Nawaz for Petitioners.
Sardar Nazar Hussain Dogar for the State.
Date of hearing : 3rd November, 1982.
Habibullah, petitioner, and his companions Salah-ud-Din and Aslam are accused of the offences under section 17 of the Offences Against Pro perty (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VI of 1979.
2. On 15th March, 1982 at about 8.30 p. m. Habibullah petitioner's co-accused Salah-ud-Din entered into the Service Shoes Shop situated in Gulberg and at pistol point he took away Rs. 4,000 from the Manager, Rizwan Ahmad, Cashier Abdul Haq, Afzal, a customer, was also present inside the shop at that time. After taking away the money, he went out threatening that if any one came near, he would be fired at. The accused fled away. Thereafter a patrol police party appeared on the scene and the matter was reported by Rizwan Ahmad to the S.I. The case was registered and investigated. Later the informant made a supplementary statement disclosing that since he was stunned by the occurrence, he had forgotten about the presence of the two other accused who were outside the shop and also had fire-arms with them and were the associates of the main accused.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that Afzal the custo mer was unable to identify Habibullah whereas Rizwan and Abdul Haq correctly identified him as the companion of the main accused Salah-ud Din. It was next contended that these three accused were apprehended from Gujranwala on 24th March, 1982 and the identification parade was held four days later during which period they were shown to the witnesses. These are matters of details and cannot be gone into deeper at the bail stage. It was also argued that Habibullah is a student of F. Sc. class and was a resident of the Frontier Province. The A. S. I. who is present with record said that fire-arms have been recovered from each accused. I have considered the matter. Undoubtedly the informant did not disclose in the first instance about the presence of the petitioner with another outside the shop. He only mentioned in the F. I. R. about the main accused who came into the shop. Under these circumstances, it would be a case of the further enquiry. I, therefore, allow Habibullah petitioner bail in the sum of Rs. 25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of A. C./Duty Magistrate, Lahore.
Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer