1990 P Cr (PLP)
Malik GHULAM MURTAZA — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL,
| Citation | 1990 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Malik GHULAM MURTAZA — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL, |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 P Cr (PLP) (Malik GHULAM MURTAZA — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Dr. Khalid Ranjha and Muzaffar Oadir for Petitioner
- Rashid Aziz Khan AA.-G. for Respondent.
- 2. Mr. Rashid Aziz Khan, Assistant Advocate-General, submits that some lawful orders were passed in this behalf by a competent authority. That order, however, is not available with him at present. According to law such remand order has to be passed on the basis of the relevant material after applying mind and not in a mechanical manner. Prima facie necessary ingredients, which were required for passing such orders, are lacking.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 491
Remand order has to be passed on basis of relevant material after applying mind and not in a mechanical manner-- Prima facie, necessary ingredients required for such order, being lacking, detenu were admitted to ad interim bail.
Judgment & Decree
S. 491
Remand order has to be passed on basis of relevant material after applying mind and not in a mechanical manner-- Prima facie, necessary ingredients required for such order, being lacking, detenu were admitted to ad interim bail. Dr. Khalid Ranjha and Muzaffar Oadir for Petitioner Rashid Aziz Khan AA.-G. for Respondent. Saeedur Rahman for the Complainant. The validity of the order dated the 25th March, 1978, vide Annexure `F' directing the Jail authorities to produce the detenu on 3rd of April, 1978 passed by Mr. Mohsin Sherazi, Duty Magistrate has been challenged. It is vehemently contended on the basis of certain authorities by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the order being illegal, custody of the detenu was not remanded to the Jail authorities in a lawful manner and as such they are liable to be set at liberty.
2. Mr. Rashid Aziz Khan, Assistant Advocate-General, submits that some lawful orders were passed in this behalf by a competent authority. That order, however, is not available with him at present. According to law such remand order has to be passed on the basis of the relevant material after applying mind and not in a mechanical manner. Prima facie necessary ingredients, which were required for passing such orders, are lacking.
3. In the circumstances, the following detenu are admitted to ad interim bail subject to their furnishing security in the sum of Rs.5,000 (Rupees five thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Khanewal.
4. It is further made clear that if after hearing the full-fledged arguments this petition fails, then the aforesaid detenu would be sent to jail.
5. To come up on the 19th of April 1978. H.B.T./G-306/L Bail granted.