1987 P Cr (PLP)
KABEER and another‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J |
| Parties | KABEER and another‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 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 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 P Cr (PLP) (KABEER and another‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497, third proviso‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 307, 323, 447, 504, 114 & 34‑‑Bail‑‑Delay in trial‑‑Accused in jail for more than two years‑‑Perusal of diaries showing that property and chemical report were not received and some times the custody was not produced‑‑Accused, held, could not be burdened for delay in trial‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Qurban Ali Chohan for Applicants. Syed Sarfraz Ahmed, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497, third proviso‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 307, 323, 447, 504, 114 & 34‑‑Bail‑‑Delay in trial‑‑Accused in jail for more than two years‑‑Perusal of diaries showing that property and chemical report were not received and some times the custody was not produced‑‑Accused, held, could not be burdened for delay in trial‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Qurban Ali Chohan for Applicants. Syed Sarfraz Ahmed, A.A.‑G. for the State. This is an application for bail on behalf of accused Kabeer and Gul Sher on the ground of delay in trial. Both the applicants alongwith co -accused are being tried for the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 323, 447, 504, 114/34, P.P.C. and the case is pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Mr. Qurban Ali Chohan learned counsel has contended that the applicants have been remained in jail for more than two years and trial has not yet been completed, therefore, applicants are entitled to bail under proviso 3 of section 497, Cr.P.C. Mr. Syed Sarfraz Ahmed learned A.A.‑G. has frankly conceded to the grant of bail to the applicants. The bail plea of applicant Gul Sher on merits was rejected by this Court by an order, dated 29‑1‑1985. Therefore, their bail has not been considered on the facts. Applicant Kabeer was arrested on 12‑11‑1984 while Gul Sher was taken into custody on 16‑11‑1984. Admittedly both the applicants were remained in jail for more than two years. It is argued by Mr. Chohan that applicant sought only one adjournment due to some unavoidable circumstances. I have gone through the case diaries. The challan was filed on 27‑11‑1984 whereas for one or the other reason, the charge was framed after about one year eleven months i.e. 20‑10‑1986. On perusal of the diaries it is clear that the property and chemical report were not available before the learned Sessions Judge and some times the custody was not produced. However, accused cannot be burdened for the delay in trial. They are entitled to get concession of bail under proviso 3 of section 497, Cr.P.C. Accordingly the applicants are admitted to bail on furnishing two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000 each and P.R. bond each to the satisfaction of Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. M.Y.H./K‑24/K Bail granted.