1968 SCMR 329 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD SHAFI-Petitioner Versus INAYAT AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1968 SCMR 329 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | S. A. Rahman, Hamoodur Rah Man and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAFI-Petitioner Versus INAYAT AND OTHERS-Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 SCMR 329 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 SCMR 329 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: S. A. Rahman, Hamoodur Rah Man and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 SCMR 329 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD SHAFI-Petitioner Versus INAYAT AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- S. Ali Raw, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Razzaque Raja, Attorney for Petitioner.
- M. Anwar, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Miss R. S. Qari, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Maqbool Ahmad Rana, Attorney for Respondents Nos. 1 to 4,
- Shamim Ahmad Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for Respondent No. 5.
Headnotes / Summary
(In the matter of an application, ;dated the 19th December 1967, for grant of bail to first four respondents herein). Penal Code (XLV of 1960), S. 302-Accused charged and convicted for murder-Acquittal by High Court-Appeal against acquittal to Supreme Court-Appeal admitted for hearing and non-bailable warrants issued-No special reasons shown why accused be released on bail pending appeal-Bail refused by Supreme Court but appeal ordered to be made ready for disposal expeditiously-Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 498.
Judgment & Decree
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.--This is a petition for bail on behalf of the first four respondents in this petition. They were charged with the murder of one Khushi Muhammad and were convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Gujrat and sentenced to transportation for life. But on appeal a learned Single Judge of the High Court acquitted them. The brother of the murdered person then came up for special leave to appeal to this Court and leave was granted on the 2nd of October 1967, to re-examine the evidence in the interest of justice. Non-bailable warrants were also directed to be issued. Hence the said respondents have now come up for bail. Learned counsel appearing on their behalf has sought, in effect, to argue on merits that this was not a fit case in which non-bailable warrants should have been directed to be issued. These questions cannot, however, be gone into at this stage, for, they will be considered at the time of the hearing of the appeal. Apart from this, no special reasons have been shown as to why the said respondents should be enlarged on bail. This was a case of a daylight murder by several persons of-whom one was armed with a gun. Gunshot injury was also found on the deceased and medical opinion was that death resulted from the gunshot injury which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. In a case of this kind there can be noel question of granting bail the application for bail is, accordingly, refused but it is directed that the appeal will be made ready with as much expedition as possible and will be posted for hearing at an early date after the return of the Court from Karachi. Bail refused.