2008 PLP 908 (YLR)
WAJID SHAMSUL HASSAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 908 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, J |
| Parties | WAJID SHAMSUL HASSAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 908 (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 2008 PLP 908 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 908 (YLR) (WAJID SHAMSUL HASSAN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- The learned Incharge Special Judge has sought direction for taking action against accused Wajid Shams ul Hassan, who was granted bail by this Court in Cr. Bail Application No.2166 of 1996 on 19-12-1996. The learned Judge has informed this Court that soon after the grant of bail the accused had jumped the concession of bail and had gone abroad as per statement at Bar filed by his Advocate. Accused Wajid Shams-ul-Hassan is not attending the Court since 24-2-1997.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.409/34
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)
Bail, cancellation of--Special Judge had sought direction for taking action against accused who, after grant of bail to him, had jumped the concession of bail and had gone abroad and was not attending the court
If bail was granted by superior Court then the Trial Court could not cancel the same on merits and the Trial Court had to make reference to the court which had granted the bail for appropriate action according to law, but in cases where accused, after grant of bail from superior court, failed to attend the Trial Court or jumped the bail, the Trial Court was competent to cancel the bail for his non-attendance and issue non-bailable warrants in order to arrest him
Trial Court was also competent to issue notice to surety under S.514 Cr.P.C. for procuring the attendance of accused
In the present case Special Judge had informed that accused had furnished surety with the Nazir of the High Court
Nazir of the court was directed to immediately send the details and particulars of surety to he Special Judge who would issue notice under S.514 Cr.P.C. to the surety and would issue non-bailable warrant of the absconding accused
Earlier order granting bail to accused was recalled/cancelled on the ground of abscondance of accused. Non Present.
Judgment & Decree
KHAWAJA NAVEED AHMED, J.
This reference has been made by the learned Incharge Special Judge, (Central-I), Karachi Mr. Farooq Ali Channa in Case No.91 of 1996 arising out of F.I.R. No.13/1996, P.S. F.I.A. CC-1 Karachi under section 409/34, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The learned Incharge Special Judge has sought direction for taking action against accused Wajid Shams ul Hassan, who was granted bail by this Court in Cr. Bail Application No.2166 of 1996 on 19-12-1996. The learned Judge has informed this Court that soon after the grant of bail the accused had jumped the concession of bail and had gone abroad as per statement at Bar filed by his Advocate. Accused Wajid Shams-ul-Hassan is not attending the Court since 24-2-1997. The law on this point is settled that if bail is granted by Superior Court then the trial Court cannot cancel the same on merits and trial Court has to make reference to the Court who has granted the bail for appropriate action according to law, but in cases where accused after grant of bail from superior Court fails to attend the trial Court or jumps the bail, the trial Court is competent to cancel the bail for non-attendance of the accused and issue non-bailable warrants in order to arrest the accused. The trial Court is also competent to issue notice to surety under section 514, Cr.P.C. for procuring the attendance of the accused and in case of failure of surety to produce the accused in Court the trial Court is competent to forfeit the bond of the surety as well as 'personal bond of the accused. This is for the information of all the trial Courts that whenever an accused who has been granted bail by the superior Courts jumps the bail, the Court should take appropriate action at its own end without making reference to the Superior Court who has granted bail, because in this way they waste considerable precious time and delay the process of justice. In this case the Incharge Special Judge has informed that the accused had furnished surety with the Nazir of this Court. Nazir is directed to immediately send the details and particulars of surety to the Incharge Special Judge who will issue notice under section 514, Cr.P.C. to the surety and will issue NBW of the absconding accused and will order forfeiture of surety according to law. The order of forfeiture of surety may be sent to this Court to enable the Nazir of this Court to recover the surety amount. The earlier order granting bail to accused in Cr. Bail Application No.2166 of 96 is hereby recalled cancelled on the ground of abscondance of the accused. The trial Court is directed to issue NBW of the accused according to law and notice to surety. Reference made by the learned Incharge Special Judge (Central-1), Karachi is disposed of accordingly. Copy of this order be sent to Nazir of this Court for compliance of the order. H.B.T./W-1/K Bail cancelled.