1989 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM MUJADDID and 2 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J |
| Parties | GHULAM MUJADDID and 2 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM MUJADDID and 2 others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Abdul Qudoos for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 526‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 148/149‑‑Bail‑‑Bail application on ground of statutory period having lapsed‑‑Record showed that delay was partly attributable to petitioner‑‑Bail refused‑‑Second bail application being on same ground also rejected‑‑Presiding Officer reported to be busy in some inquiry and trial not likely to commence soon‑‑Case ordered to be transferred to another Court with direction to dispose of same within a specified period. A.H. Masood for the State. Rau
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 3347‑B of 1988, decided on 30th October. 1988. ‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 526‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 148/149‑‑Bail‑‑Bail application on ground of statutory period having lapsed‑‑Record showed that delay was partly attributable to petitioner‑‑Bail refused‑‑Second bail application being on same ground also rejected‑‑Presiding Officer reported to be busy in some inquiry and trial not likely to commence soon‑‑Case ordered to be transferred to another Court with direction to dispose of same within a specified period. Mian Abdul Qudoos for Petitioners. A.H. Masood for the State. Rau An earlier application on behalf of present petitioner (Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2382/13 of 1988) was filed on the ground that in spite of lapse of statutory period the trial has not so far completed. While considering the said application, I had examined the interim orders recorded by the learned trial Judge which indicated that the delay in completion of the trial was party attributable to the co‑accused of the petitioner. The trial at that time was fixed for 12‑'9‑1988. In view of that, the bail to the petitioner was not allowed. This is second petition for bail on behalf of Ghulam Mujaddid petitioner on same ground. As earlier application on this very ground was dismissed by this Court, I am not; inclined to allow this second application which is accordingly dismissed. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned trial! Judge is busy in some enquiry in District Muzaffargarh and as such, the trial is not likely to commence at an early date. I, therefore, direct that this case (F.I.R. No. 275/85, dated 29‑11‑1985) be withdrawn from the File of Mr. Sher Zaheer Ahmad Khan. It is entrusted to Rao Iqbal Ahmad Khan, Sessions Judge,, Sheikhupura, who will complete trial of this case before 31‑1‑1989. A.A./G‑186/L Order according.