| Case ID |
3726c993-96dd-45bd-9e4c-ffa523d01dcf |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Crl. B.A. No. 266 of 2004 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 21, 2004 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The bail application of the applicant Kamal Mirbahar has been dismissed due to the evidence presented against him. The court found that he was seen committing theft at the complainant's house, where he was apprehended shortly after the crime, along with a stolen bullock and a secured pistol. The complainant's version was corroborated by co-villagers, leading the court to conclude that the bail plea could not be sustained under the circumstances. The decision emphasized the nature of the crime as lurking house trespass by night, which falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| Summary |
In the case of Crl. B.A. No. 266 of 2004, the Sindh High Court addressed the bail application of Kamal Mirbahar, who was accused of theft under sections 380, 457, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The incident occurred during the night when the complainant, Naban, was alerted by barking dogs and confronted the accused. The court found that the applicant was caught in the act of committing theft and was apprehended with a stolen bullock and a weapon. The court dismissed the bail application based on the evidence provided and the nature of the crime, establishing that the applicant's actions constituted lurking house trespass. The ruling highlighted the importance of the complainant's testimony and the supporting evidence from local villagers, reinforcing the decision against granting bail. This case underscores the legal principles surrounding theft and the conditions under which bail may be denied, particularly in instances of property crimes committed under aggravated circumstances. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
WAHID BUX BROHI, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Ahsan Ahmed Memon,
Muhammad Ismail Bhutto,
Safdar Ali Bhutto
|
| Petitioners |
Kamal
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2005 SLD 576 = 2005 MLD 472
|
| Other Citations |
Dhano v. State (1984 PCr.LJ 16),
Muhammad Yar v. State (1992 PCr.LJ 514)
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979,
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
|
| Sections |
497,
14,
34,
380,
457
|