1989 P Cr (PLP)
Ch. ALLAH DIITA Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khalilur Rehman Khan, J |
| Parties | Ch. ALLAH DIITA Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khalilur Rehman Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (Ch. ALLAH DIITA Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Ijaz Ahmed for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V' or 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 498‑‑Anticipatory bail, grant of‑‑Non‑bailable warrants issued by Assistant Commissioner of another Province in pursuance of a case before him‑‑Anticipatory bail for 15 days granted by High Court to enable accused to move competent Court for bail. Muhammad Amin v. The State 1973 P Cr. L J 661 ref., Shahid Iqbal, AA.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 498‑‑Anticipatory bail, grant of‑‑Non‑bailable warrants issued by Assistant Commissioner of another Province in pursuance of a case before him‑‑Anticipatory bail for 15 days granted by High Court to enable accused to move competent Court for bail. Muhammad Amin v. The State 1973 P Cr. L J 661 ref., Ch. Ijaz Ahmed for Petitioner. Shahid Iqbal, AA.‑G. for the State. Ch. Allah Ditta applicant seeks anticipatory bail as he apprehends arrest in pursuant to non‑bailable warrant of arrest issued by Assistant Commissioner Zhob, Baluchistan. It is asserted on his behalf that he is neither resident of Zhob nor he has ever visited Zhob nor he has ever entered into a transaction with any person resident of Zhob. According to learned counsel he paid Rs.10,000 to one Ghulam Rasul who had some dispute with one Alam Din and that the remaining sum of Rs.10,000 in dispute was agreed to be directly paid by Alam Din after settlement of accounts. He asserts that Alam Din and Ghulam Rasul both are residents of Sargodha, and that it appears that some case has been got registered due to manipulation of aforesaid Ghulam Rasul. The non‑bailable warrants of arrest have been issued in order to cause undue harassment to the petitioner.
2. There is nothing on the record to frame any opinion as to the assertions made. Learned counsel relies on Muhammad Amin v. The State 1973 P Cr. I, J
661. As the non‑bailable warrants of arrest have been issued I deem it proper in the circumstances of this case to allow interim anticipatory bail for 15 days to the applicant on his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to enable him to approach competent Court to get remedy in accordance with law. The petitioner shall not be arrested till 30‑6‑1981. S.A./A‑695/L Bail allowed.