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. 1007-B of 1983, decided on 30th July, 1983.
-- S. 497-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 440-Bail, grant of-Peti tioner, accused of committing offence under section 44U, P. P. C. for having cut down certain trees from a house partially in his possession and litigation as to its title still going on between parties-Petitioner joined investigation and question whether trees cut down by peti tioner or uprooted by windstorm needs further inquiry --Petitioner allowed bail, in circumstances.
Abdul Sattar Goreya for Petitioner.
Ch. Wali Muhammad with Sh. Naeem Goreja for the Complainant.
Nasim Rashid for the State.
Date of hearing: 30th July, 1983.
Muhammad Asghar petitioner applied for the grant of pre-arrest bail to this Court after his earlier application was declined by Addl. Sessions Judge, Sahiwal.
2. A case has been registered against the petitioner and three others under section 440, P. P. C. at Police Station B Division Sahiwal, for having cut down certain trees from House No. 195 partially in his possession and litigation as to its title is still going on between the parties. The dispute is now pending decision before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, wherein a status quo order has been issued.
3. The petitioner was allowed interim bail on 23-7-1983. The matter has come up for final bearing today.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and also perused the record.
5. Admittedly the title of the house from where the trees have been cut down is under dispute and status quo in this regard has been ordered by the-Supreme Court. Plea of the petitioner is that he did not cut the trees rather they were uprooted by windstorm, A. S. I. Sajjawal Khan the Investigating Officer who is present in Court states that the petitioner has joined the investigation. In view of the status quo order issued by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the fallen/cut trees could be given to the party ultimately found to be owner of the house. Again it needs further inquiry whether the trees were cut by petitioner or had fallen due to act of God. In these circumstances. I find it a fit case for confirming the interim bail granted earlier to the petitioner.
M. Y. H. Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer