2007 PLP 1152 (YLR)
NAZAR HUSSAIN and another-Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1152 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J |
| Parties | NAZAR HUSSAIN and another-Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1152 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1152 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1152 (YLR) (NAZAR HUSSAIN and another-Petitioners Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Waseem Shahab for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 497(5) & 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 337-A (ii), 337-F(iii)/34
Accused earlier were granted bail after arrest, but on filing application for cancellation of bail by complainant, notices were issued to accused who did not appear before the court and consequently their bail was cancelled
Court, however without taking any step to secure their attendance in the Court had straightaway cancelled their bail
Counsel for accused had thus rightly contended that accused were not served and the report submitted by the police regarding service of notices was false and fabricated
Order cancelling bail, was accordingly set aside, and application for cancellation of bail would be deemed to be pending before the court below which would decide the same on merits
Accused would appear before the Court on date fixed in that respect. Ghulam Farid for the Complainant. Rao Atif Nawaz for the State.
Judgment & Decree
FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.
The petitioners were arrested in case F.I.R. No.175 dated 1-9-2005 registered under sections 337-A(ii), 337-F(iii), and 34, P.P.C. at Police Station Karampur, Tehsil Mailsi, District Vehari. They were granted bail after arrest by the Magistrate vide order dated 1-11-2005. The complainant moved an application for cancellation of bail in which notices were issued in the name of the petitioners to appear before the Court on 28-11-2005. The petitioners did not appear before the Court and their bail was cancelled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 28-11-2005. The petitioners were allowed pre-arrest bail by this Court on 25-1-2006.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that due to collusion of process server concerned police officials as well as complainant of the case, the petitioners remained uniformed about the pendency of the cancellation of bail; the petitioners were not even alleged to misuse the concession of bail and the grounds of cancellation of bail were not available, which aspect of the case was overlooked and' that keeping the petitioners behind the bars no useful purpose will be served.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant contends that the petitioners while filing second bail application on 27-10-2005 concealed the facts that his earlier bail application was dismissed. It is further contended that the petitioners were served but despite service they did not appear before the Court. Learned State counsel has supported the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant. However, he submits that it was incumbent upon the Court that before cancellation of bail to issue bailable or non-bailable warrants against the petitioners.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. Admittedly, the bail of the petitioners was cancelled due to their non-appearance before the Court. However, the learned Judge without taking any step to secure their attendance in the Court straightaway cancelled their bail, whereas, the learned counsel for the petitioners has very strongly argued that the petitioners were not served and the report submitted by the police regarding service of notice was fake and fabricated.
6. In this view of the matter, without dilating upon the merits of the case the order dated. 28-11-2005 is set aside. The application for cancellation of bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge shall deem to be pending, who shall decide the application on merit. The petitioners shall appear before the said Court on 10-3-2006. H.B.T./N-120/L Order accordingly.