Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 549‑B/BWP of 1984, decided on 20th May, 1984.

‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 379‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused being in jail, no more required for Investigation‑‑Offence not falling within prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.‑‑Accused allowed bail.

------S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860). S. 379‑‑Bail‑‑Accused otherwise entitled to bail‑‑Mere fact of fixing of date for trial, held, could not be a ground to refuse concession of bail.

Malik Muhammad Aslam for Petitioner.

Daud Ahmad Qureshi for the State.

Date of hearing: 20th May, 1984.

This is an application for bail on behalf of Shaukat Khan petitioner in a case under section 379, P.P.C. registered at P.S. Railway, Samma Satta, vide F.I.R. No. 19/84, dated 2‑4‑1984.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner removed Rs.144 from the pocket of Ghulam Mustafa complainant.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in jail for more than 1 months and that the alleged offence is not punishable with 10 years or more.

Conversely, the learned counsel for the State has opposed the plea for bail of the petitioner. He informs that the case is fixed on 22‑5‑1984 for trial.

4. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that the petitioner is in jail; that he is no more required for investigation and that the alleged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The mere fact that the case is fixed for hearing is no ground to refuse the concession of bail to an accused person who is otherwise entitled to it.

5. For what has been stated above, the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.5,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Bahawalpur.

H.A.K. Bail allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.