1996 PLP 1656 (SCMR)
BARKAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1996 PLP 1656 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | BARKAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 1656 (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 1996 PLP 1656 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 1656 (SCMR) (BARKAT ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Sardar Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Ch: Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 29th January, 1994.
- M. Sardar Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Ch: Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nasir-ul-Mulk, Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P. for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of Peshawar High Court, dated 5‑1‑1994 passed in Cr. No. 935/93). , ‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 295‑C‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Bail‑‑‑Order passed by High Court was discretionary order and reasons given therein for rejecting the bail plea of accused did not suffer from any infirmity‑‑=Leave to appeal was refused accordingly. Nasir‑ul‑Mulk, Advocate‑General, N.‑W.F.P. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SAIDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.
The petitioner is seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of a learned Judge in Chambers of the Peshawar High Court, dated 5-1-1994, declining bail to the petitioner in a case registered against him under section 295-C, P.P.C. The bail has been refused on the following grounds: "Whether it is section 295-C or 295-A, P.P.C. or a mere attempt to commit such offence, in each case it falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. At this stage, the petitioner is reasonably linked with the offence. Moreover, his release is not justified on two-fold grounds one is that being an Afghan Refugee he might abscond for even to Afghanistan and the second is that after such release he might not be hurt by someone. This is over and above the fact that he is, prima facie, linked with the offence., The application is, therefore, rejected." The order passed by the learned Judge in Chambers is a discretionary order and reasons given by the learned Judge for rejecting the bail plea of the petitioner do not suffer from any infirmity. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. However, keeping in view the circumstances of the case, we direct the trial Court to conclude the trial of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. N.H.Q./B-260/S Leave refused.