Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1993 P Cr. L J 626

MUHAMMAD ILYAS and 2 others vs THE STATE

Citation1993 P Cr. L J 626
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Crl. Misc. No,3010/B of 1992
Date1992-10-05
Judge(s)Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday
ResultBail refused

ORDER

' The three petitioners alongwith others stand accused of an offence punishable under section 395 of the P.P.C. As also of an offence punishable under section 17 of Ordinance VI of 1979 on the allegation that after blocking Sheikhupura-Sargodha Road near Khanqah Dogran they looted the truck drivers who were passing on that road. They were alleged to have not only decamped with cash amount after the occurrence but had also damaged one of the trucks when they had fired upon the same. None of the accused persons, including the petitioners, had been nominated in the said F.I.R.

2. It was during the investigation when these three petitioners were arrested on 27-2-1992 whereafter, they had been sent to judicial custody on the very next day i,e. On 28-2-1992 for the purpose of test identification parade which was held on 18-3-1992 in the premises of Sheikhupura Jail under the supervision of a Magistrate. Rehan, Shahid Iqbal, Riaz-ul-Hassan and Mushtaq P.Ws.

Who were the truck drivers, etc. Of the trucks in question had correctly identified all the three petitioners in the said parade while Hadee P.W. Had identified only Ilyas petitioner. The P.Ws. Claim that the looted amount had been returned to them by these accused persons and they handed over the same amount to the Investigating Officer but a tape-recorder had been recovered at the instance of the petitioners and their co-accused, though it was on a joint pointation.

3. In view of the fact that the petitioners had been correctly identified by at least four eye-witnesses at a test identification parade which had been supervised by a Magistrate and also in view of the fact that the petitioners have not been able to offer any explanation as to why they should have been falsely implicated in the occurrence in question, I do not find the petitioners entitled to the concession of bail.

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