1968 PLP 1266 (SCMR)
SIRAJ DIN‑Petitioner Versus DAGGA AND OTHERS‑Respondent
| Citation | 1968 PLP 1266 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SIRAJ DIN‑Petitioner Versus DAGGA AND OTHERS‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 PLP 1266 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 PLP 1266 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 PLP 1266 (SCMR) (SIRAJ DIN‑Petitioner Versus DAGGA AND OTHERS‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawaja Sultan Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Masood Akhtar Sheikh, Attorney for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 20th June 1968.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 22nd February 1968, in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 799 of 1968).
S. 302 and Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 497‑Person, accused only of instigating murder, granted bail by High Court‑Order granting bail, held, did not in circumstance, call for any interference‑Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court. ORDER MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑We see no reason to differ with the order of the High Court granting bail to the respondents 1 and 2. They caused no injury to the deceased, but are said to have instigated their companion Aziz who alone caused the fatal injuries to the deceased with a kassi. It cannot be said that the view taken by the High Court was in breach of the terms of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to warrant interference by this Court. The petition for leave to appeal is dismissed. Leave refused.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑We see no reason to differ with the order of the High Court granting bail to the respondents 1 and
2. They caused no injury to the deceased, but are said to have instigated their companion Aziz who alone caused the fatal injuries to the deceased with a kassi. It cannot be said that the view taken by the High Court was in breach of the terms of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to warrant interference by this Court. The petition for leave to appeal is dismissed. Leave refused.