MLD 1985

1985 PLP 789(2) (MLD)

MUHAMMAD AJMAL KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3 of 1983 in Criminal Appeal No705 of 1981, decided on 20th December, 1983.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1985 PLP 789(2) (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J
Parties MUHAMMAD AJMAL KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 789(2) (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 789(2) (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 789(2) (MLD) (MUHAMMAD AJMAL KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 426--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302--Bail, grant of--Petitioners appeAl not heard within a period of 2 years of his conviction under S. 302, P. P.C--Petitioner's case, held, covered by clause (c) of subsection (1-A) of S. 426, Cr.P.C. and as such he earned right of bail in circumstances--Petitioner's sentence suspended and he allowed bail. Zahid Hussain Khan and Rabnawaz Khan Niazi for the Petitioner. Nemo for the State.

Judgment & Decree

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3 of 1983 The petitioner has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000 vide judgment, dated 24th November, 1981. This is a second petition for the suspension of sentence, the first one having been rejected on 23rd June, 1982. The fresh ground urged for bail is that the appeal of the petitioner having not been heard within a period of two years of his conviction, he has earned the right of bail. The case falls under clause (c) of subsection (1-A) of section 426, Cr.P.C. Consequently, the sentence of the petitioner is suspended A subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Mianwali. S.G.D. Bail allowed.