1999 PLP 315 (YLR)
GULAB — Petitioner Versus SHAH GUL and 5 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1999 PLP 315 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J |
| Parties | GULAB — Petitioner Versus SHAH GUL and 5 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 315 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 315 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Jawaid Nawaz Khan Gandapur, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 315 (YLR) (GULAB — Petitioner Versus SHAH GUL and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Javed A. Khan for Petitioner
- 4. Mr. Javed A. Khan, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner present and heard. Record of the case perused carefully.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.324/148/149
Cancellation of bail-- Reasonable grounds, prima facie, did not exist for believing that the accused had committed the offence charged with
Sessions Court for quite sufficient and convincing reasons, had granted bail to accused by means of a speaking order and no justification was available for interfering with the discretion judiciously exercised by it-- Petition for cancellation of bail granted to accused by Sessions Court was dismissed in limine accordingly. Syed Amanullah Shah v. State PLD 1996 SC 241 ref.
S.497(5)
Cancellation of bail granted by a Court of competent jurisdiction
principles. Strong and exceptional grounds are required for the cancellation of bail granted by a Court of competent jurisdiction because the provisions of section 497(5), Cr.P.C. are not at all punitive. Resultantly there is no legal compulsion even for the cancellation of the bail granted in cases which are punishable with death/life imprisonment/imprisonment for ten years. Additionally the accused is not to be deprived of the benefit of bail whenever reasonable doubt arises about his participation in the crime or about the truth/probability of the prosecution case. In such a situation, it would be better to keep him on bail than in the jail during the period of the trial and the personal liberty granted to him by a Court of competent jurisdiction, through grant of bail, should not be snatched away from him unless it becomes absolutely necessary to do so under the law. Syed Amanullah Shah v. State PLD 1996 SC 241 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Additionally the accused is not to be deprived of the benefit of bail whenever reasonable doubt arises about his participation in the crime or about the truth/probability of the prosecution case. In such a situation, it would be better to keep him on bail than in the jail during the period of the trial and the personal liberty granted to him by a Court of competent jurisdiction, through grant of bail, should not be snatched away from him unless it becomes absolutely necessary to do so under the law. Syed Amanullah Shah v. State PLD 1996 SC 241 ref. Javed A. Khan for Petitioner Respondents Nos. l to 5 stand charged for having committed an offence punishable under section 324/148/149, P. P. C., Vide; F. I. R. No. 581, dated 13-11-1998 lodged in Police Station, Batagram, District Charsadda.
2. After having failed to procure bail from the Senior Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Charsadda (Mr. Ishtiaq Ahmed Khan), the respondents approached the Additional Sessions Judge, Charsadda (Mr. Fayyazullah Khan) for the redress of their grievance. He, by his order, dated 9-1-1999 and 16-1-1999, admitted them to bail.
3. Hence this bail cancellation petition.
4. Mr. Javed A. Khan, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner present and heard. Record of the case perused carefully.
5. On a close scrutiny of the material placed on file I am of the opinion that prima facie reasonable grounds do not exist for believing that respondents Nos.1 to 5 have committed the offence. The reasons for granting bail to them are quite sufficient/convincing and the Additional Sessions Judge, Charsadda has recorded a' speaking order. In the circumstances I do not see any justification as to why the discretion exercised by the Additional Sessions Judge judiciously be interfered with by this Court.
6. Even otherwise, strong and exceptional grounds are required for the cancellation of bail granted by a Court of competent jurisdiction because the provisions 'of section 497(5), Cr.P.C. are not at all punitive. Resultantly there is no legal compulsion even for the cancellation of the bail granted in cases which are punishable with death/life imprisonment/imprisonment for ten years.
7. Additionally the accused is not to be deprived of the benefit of bail whenever reasonable doubt arises about his participation in the crime or about the truth/probability of the prosecution case. In such a situation, it would be better to keep him on bail than in the jail during the period of the trial and the personal liberty granted to him by a Court of competent jurisdiction, through grant of bail, should not be snatched away from his unless it becomes absolutely necessary to do so under the law. In this respect I am supported by the following case:-- (1) PLD 1996 SC 241 (Syed Amanullah Shah v. The State).
8. In the circumstances I am of the view that this petition for the cancellation of bail is without any substance. The same is accordingly dismissed in limine. N.H.Q./326/P Petition dismissed.