1983 P Cr (PLP)
ALI ASGHAR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1983 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | ALI ASGHAR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 P Cr (PLP) (ALI ASGHAR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- R. A. Awan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 497‑Bail‑Speedy trial‑No complete o incomplete challan filed in Court within one year of arrest of accused‑Delay in submis sion of challan, held, justifies grant of bail‑Complainant or Police indulging in delaying tactics, frustrates power of Court‑Duty of Court in such circumstances to save accused from unwarranted detention by granting bail. Karim Nawaz for the State.
Judgment & Decree
This is an application for bail on behalf of Ali Asghar petitioner in a case under section 302/34, P. P. C. registered at Police Station, Gulberg, Faisalabad on 6th August, 1980. The case was originally registered under section 307/34, P. P. C. but after the death of Faiz‑ul‑Hassan deceased the charge was converted to that of murder.
2. The allegations against the petitioner are that he alongwith three others caused the death of Faiz‑ul‑Hassan in the area of Shahzad Cinema, Faisalabad. So far as the petitioner is concerned, it is alleged that at the time of occurrence he was armed with knife and gave one injury on the left side of the back of the deceased, which was declared simple.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 6th August, 1980 and no complete or incomplete challan has been submitted so far and that petitioner has been mechanically remanded to judicial custody without factual or legal justification.
4. As against this learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed this application on the ground that the alleged offence being punishable with death or imprisonment for life, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. I have recorded the statement of Amin Ali Shah, S. I. repre sentative of the police. He admits that no complete or incomplete challan has been submitted so far and that he is not in a position to state as to when the challan in this case would be submitted.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioner was arrested on 6th August, 1980 and so far no complete or incomplete challan has been submitted without any fault of the petitioner. I am of the opinion that speedy trial is the right of an accused person and if there is inordinate delay in the submission of the challan or in the proceedings without any fault on the part of an accused person then he is justified in asking for bail. If the police or the complainant indulges in delaying tactics or frustrates the powers of the Court, then it would be the duty of the Court to come to the rescue of an accused person and save him from unwarranted detention by allowing bail to him.
7. For the foregoing reasons, I allow the petitioner bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A. C. Faisalabad. It would be open to the State and the complainant to apply for cancellation of bail of the petitioner after the submission of the challan if so advised. M.Y.M. Bail granted