1986 PLP 1504 (SCMR)
TUFAIL and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1504 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ |
| Parties | TUFAIL and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1504 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1504 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1504 (SCMR) (TUFAIL and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 23rd June, 1986.
- Muhammad Abdus Saleem, Advocate. Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for. Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 185(3)--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.426--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302--Suspension of sentence--Bail--Conviction of accused under 5.302, Penal Code maintained by High Court--No case made out for grant of bail--Bail refused. Muhammad Abdus Saleem, Advocate. Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for. Petitioners.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑Tufail Baig and Khadum Hussain petitioners were tried and convicted under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.3,000 each. Their appeal before the High Court failed. Therefore, they have filed the present petition (Criminal Petition No. 276 of 1983) for leave to appeal against their conviction and sentence.
2. They have now filed an application for grant of bail during the pendency of the main petition.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. He argued that the petitioners have a very good case on merits and shall subsequently be acquitted. He attempted to argue the main case on merits but it was pointed out that two Courts below have already found the petitioners guilty of murder and this is, therefore, got a fit case to reappraise the evidence at this stage and that he can urge the contentions on merit at the time of hearing of the main petition. No case is made out for grant of bail in the face of conviction under section 302, P.P.C. which has been upheld by the High Court. The bail application is, therefore, dismissed. M.Y.H. Bail refused.