YLR 2006

2006 PLP 1381 (YLR)

JAHAD WALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Bail Application No.96 of 2006, decided on 24th March, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Afzal Soomro and Faisal Arab, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 1381 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Muhammad Afzal Soomro and Faisal Arab, JJ
Parties JAHAD WALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1381 (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 2006 PLP 1381 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Soomro and Faisal Arab, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1381 (YLR) (JAHAD WALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(b)

Bail, grant of

Accused was minor and State Counsel had also conceded to grant of bail

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Muhammad Ayaz Soomro for Applicant. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto for the State.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO, J.

The applicant seeks bail in Crime No.1 of 2006 of Police Station Excise Circle Shikarpur registered for an offence under section 9(c) C.N.A. Act, 1997. On 1-3-2006, the bail plea moved on behalf of the applicant was declined by the trial Court. It is contended by the learned counsel that the applicant/accused is a juvenile offender being 15 years of age and that the crime against him falls under clause 9(b) of C.N.S Act which is not within the prohibitory clause of Act. He urged that under the above circumstances, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. He further submits that the denial of bail would amount to convict the applicant without proper trial. Learned State Counsel also concedes to the grant of bail. Keeping in view the fact that the' applicant/accused is minor, coupled with the consent extended by the learned State Counsel, the applicant is enlarged on bail on furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./J-6/K Bail granted.