1993 P Cr (PLP)
MAZHAR IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1993 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MAZHAR IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 P Cr (PLP) (MAZHAR IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Nawaz for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 514
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5..111
Accused after having been released on bail on surety bond of the petitioner did not turn up for a long time
Accused, however, appeared subsequently in the Court and had since been convicted and sentenced in the case and was presently undergoing the sentence
Penalty of Rs.10,000 imposed on the petitioner by Trial Court was reduced to Rs.3,000 in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Tariq Mehmood Mughal for the State. Date of hearing: 8th March, 1993. This revision petition filed under section 439, Cr.P.C. arises from an order passed by the District Magistrate, Okara whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by him under section 515, Cr.P.C. against the order, dated 1-7-1989 passed by the Magistrate, 1st Class, Okara whereby he imposed Rs.10,000 as penalty against the petitioner as he stood surety for Muhammad Akram--accused in case under section 411, P.P.C. of Police Station Gogera on 27-4-1988 and did not turn up for a long time.
2. A notice under section 514, Cr.P.C. was given to Mazhar Iqbal-- petitioner who had executed the bail bonds and therefore, stood surety for the accused and his bail bonds were forfeited and he was imposed Rs.10,000 as penalty when the accused absconded. The petitioner filed appeal before the learned District Magistrate which was also dismissed. Hence this revision petition.
3. At the very outset, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the accused appeared subsequently before the learned trial Court and was also convicted, therefore, this penalty of Rs.10,000 may be reduced to the minimum of Rs.1,000 as he is a poor person. Ye had not stood surety for any monetary gain.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State conceded to the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner to the extent that if the amount is reduced from Rs.10,000 to Rs.5,000 as penalty.
5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case when the accused appeared subsequently in the Court and he has since been convicted and sentenced in the case, and is now undergoing the sentence, so I if direct that the penalty amount be reduced from Rs.10,000 to Rs.3,000 only. This reduced amount was accepted by both the sides and the learned counsel for the petitioner undertook to deposit the same within one month from the date of this order. In default of payment of the same, legal proceedings shall be taken against the petitioner. In the abovesaid terms, this petition is disposed of. N.H.Q./M-917/L Penalty amount reduced.