2006 PLP 1699 (YLR)
NISAR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1699 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah, J |
| Parties | NISAR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1699 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1699 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1699 (YLR) (NISAR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mehmood-ul-Haq Thanvi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 514
Petitioner/surety through petition had challenged order whereby his surety bond was confiscated and he was ordered to pay surety amount
Petitioner was a poor illiterate person who stood surety for accused out of benevolence and on humanitarian considerations and not for any monetary personal gain
Accused for whom petitioner stood surety were subsequently acquitted by the Trial Court before passing impugned order
Absence of accused was not intentional, but was due to bona fide mistake
Forfeited amount was reduced from Rs.25,000 to Rs. 5000, in circumstances. Faisal Ali Qazi A.A.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SYED SAJJAD HUSSAIN SHAH, J.
Petitioner Nisar Ahmad through the instant petition has challenged the order dated 13-4-2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad whereby he confiscated the surety bond and ordered to pay the surety amount in each case i.e. Rs.25,000 + Rs.25,000 to the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a poor person and has no source at all to pay the said surety amount which is too harsh; that the petitioner stood surety on the humanitarian basis and that the absence of the accused was not wilful as the accused appeared before the Court in which he submitted the bail bonds. On the other hand, learned A.A.-G. opposed the instant petition.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. The petitioner is a poor illiterate person who stood surety for Muhammad Pervaiz and Nisar out of benevolence and humanitarian consideration and not for any monetary personal gain. Further taking into the consideration that the accused Muhammad Pervaiz and Nisar appeared were subsequently acquitted by the trial Court before passing the impugned order.
5. Keeping in view that the absence of both the accused was not intentional but due to bona fide mistake, subsequent their arrest and acquittal by the trial Court, coupled with the fact that the petitioner stood surety for not any personal gain, I reduce the forfeited amount from Rs.25,000 to Rs.5,000 each. The petitioner shall deposit the forfeited amount within two weeks with the concerned Court.
6. With the above modification, this petition is dismissed. H.B.T./N-37/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.