1989 PLP 402 (SCMR)
MIR AKBAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 402 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ |
| Parties | MIR AKBAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 402 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 402 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 402 (SCMR) (MIR AKBAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zafar Mahmood, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Shakirullah Jan, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 15th October, 1988.
- Zafar Mahmood, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Shakirullah Jan, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- K.G. Sabir, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
- It might be hazardous for the petitioner, if we express any opinion with regard to the state of his health or the nature of the ailment. However, much can be said about both. Therefore, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, we would like the petitioner to be treated by the same doctor for his heart ailment by admitting him on his bed, in the hospital. Mr. K.G. Sabir, the learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Advocate‑General, has undertaken to get the petitioner admitted in the hospital, . as. directed above, of course, through the Advocate‑General.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar, dated 16-7-1988 in Cr. Misc. No. 163 of 1988).
S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Accused, an ailing person, granted interim bail for treatment as an indoor patent--On discharge from hospital interim bail would be deemed to have ended/expired. K.G. Sabir, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Interim bail was allowed to the petitioner on ground of illness (heart ailment) by one of our learned brothers in chambers. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the arguments which prevailed earlier for passing the interim order. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition mainly on the ground that the petitioner does not suffer such heart ailment which cannot be treated in jail hospital. We have noticed from the medical certificate that Dr. Sahibzada Waheed Ahmad, Cardiologist, PGMI Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar, was also of the view that the petitioner needed medication prescribed by him; and further hat he should "avoid strenuous exercise because of his heart condition". It might be hazardous for the petitioner, if we express any opinion with regard to the state of his health or the nature of the ailment. However, much can be said about both. Therefore, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, we would like the petitioner to be treated by the same doctor for his heart ailment by admitting him on his bed, in the hospital. Mr. K.G. Sabir, the learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Advocate‑General, has undertaken to get the petitioner admitted in the hospital, . as. directed above, of course, through the Advocate‑General. Dr. Sahibzada Waheed Ahmad or his successor would give the normal care and treatment to the petitioner. When he feels that no more treatment to the petitioner is necessary as and indoor patient and he is thus to be discharged from the hospital, the interim bail period granted by this Court would be then, deemed to have ended/expired, Accordingly, while converting this petition into an appeal, we partly allow the same and extend the interim bail order dated 3‑9‑1988 till the day the petitioner is A discharged from the hospital, as directed above. Before closing this order, it might be observed that if the petitioner would not have been involved in a murder case which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life or otherwise on merits, it might have been a marginal case, the orders might have been different. MA.K./M‑644/S Order accordingly.