Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
PLJ 2007 Cr.C. (Lahore) 1021

Syed MAQSOOM HUSSAIN SHAH vs STATE

CitationPLJ 2007 Cr.C. (Lahore) 1021
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Crl. Misc. No 920-B of 2006
Date2006-09-27
Judge(s)Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah
ResultBail dismissed

ORDER

Petitioner Syed Maqsoom Hussain Shah through the instant petition has sought post-arrest bail in a case FIR No. 171 dated 29.5.2004 under Sections 420/468/471/34 PPC registered with Police Station Shahzad Town, Islamabad.

2. The prosecution case as narrated by the complainant Abdul Wahid is that the petitioner alongwith his co-accused committed fraud with him in a deal of plot and deprived him of Rs.

6,00,000/- by preparing forged documents. He shown a plot and the deal was done for Rs.

6,00,000/- The petitioner mentioned the location of the plot in Tarlai Khurd and when they collected building material, for the purpose of construction, it transpired that this plot stands in the name of another person.

3. It is contended by the Learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on the ground that he is close relative to his co-accused; there is no mentioning of time and date of occurrence in the FIR; the petitioner neither sold said plot nor received any amount; he is only signatury of the agreement to sell; no offence is made out from the contents of the FIR; it is a case of further inquiry, he is behind the bars and no more required for further investigation.

4. Conversely, the Learned counsel for the State opposed the instant petition.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused.

6. The petitioner alongwith his co-accused Fayyaz Hussain Shah (close relative of the petitioner) deprived the complainant from Rs. 6,00,000/- by showing him a plot which was not owned and possessed by his co-accused and committed fraud with the complainant. Although, the offences for which the petitioner is being charged do not fall under the prohibitory clause but as the petitioner has deprived an innocent person from his life long earning, therefore, he does not deserve for any discretionary relief.

7. It is informed that Challan has been submitted in the Court against the petitioner. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within three months.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch