1990 PLP 1542 (MLD)
GUL HASSAN SHAH‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1542 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Mazhar Ali, J |
| Parties | GUL HASSAN SHAH‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1542 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 1542 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Mazhar Ali, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1542 (MLD) (GUL HASSAN SHAH‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.497(1), third proviso‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.11/16‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Bail was sought on the solitary ground of statutory delay over one year in disposal of the case with the contention that no adjournment was sought on behalf of accused who was neither a previous convict nor a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal‑‑‑Prosecution did not oppose bail application‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.497(1), third proviso‑‑‑Accused has a statutory right of being enlarged on bail if he has continuously remained under detention for a period over one year for an offence not punishable with death and whose trial for such offence has not concluded‑‑‑Only ground on which said right can be declined is that accused is either a previous convict or that he is a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. Abdul Nabi A. Palh for Applicant. Shaukat H. Zubedi, A: A.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.497(1), third proviso‑‑‑Accused has a statutory right of being enlarged on bail if he has continuously remained under detention for a period over one year for an offence not punishable with death and whose trial for such offence has not concluded‑‑‑Only ground on which said right can be declined is that accused is either a previous convict or that he is a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. Abdul Nabi A. Palh for Applicant. Shaukat H. Zubedi, A: A.G. for the State. This application has been presented on behalf of Gul Hassan Shah s/o Ghulam Rasul Shah, who is facing trial for the offence under section 11/16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 vide crime No. 47/88. The solitary ground on which this application has been made is of statutory delay over one year in disposal of the case as the applicant is a continuously in custody for over one year. He was arrested on 26th April, 1988, an a it is since then that he is in custody. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that no adjournment was sought on behalf of the accused ad that he is neither a previous convict nor hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. The bail application presented before the learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, has been rejected upon consideration of the merits of the case. No observation has been made by the learned trial Court, with regard to the application or otherwise of the fourth proviso to section 497 (1), Cr.P.C. The learned A.‑A.G. does not oppose the bail application. I am really surprised to note that the learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, has failed to dispose of the bail applic9tion in accordance with the law despite there being a treasure of authorities by now available on the subject. It is a statutory right of an accused to be enlarged on bail if he has continuously remained under detention for a rind over one year and whose trial for such offence has not concluded and the offence is not punishable with death. The only ground on which his right to be released on bail can be declined, is that he is either a previous convict or that he is a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case I would admit: the applicant to bail subject to his furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.50,000, (Rupees fifty thousand) with PR in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./G‑183/K Bail allowed.