2006 P Cr (PLP)
SHOUKAT ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHOUKAT ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 P Cr (PLP) (SHOUKAT ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860),S.161
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)
Earlier bail application of accused was rejected with direction to the Trial Court for concluding trial within one month, but no progress was made even in such extended period and position remained the same
Maximum punishment for offence of accused was seven years
Trial of case was not likely to conclude in near future
State counsel had no objection, if bail was granted to accused
Bail was granted accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
ATTA-UR-REHMAN, J.
According to the facts of the case the applicant was initially arrested in this matter some time in February-March, 1998. Thereafter he jumped the bail some time in August, 1997 and remained absconder for about three years and was arrested on 24-3-2001. He moved an application before the trial Court for bail which was rejected and thereafter he moved an application before this Court which too was rejected and a direction was given to the trial Court for concluding the trial within one month. However, the trial could not be concluded and therefore, he moved another bail application before the trial Court which was dismissed on 16-6-2001. In the meantime, the trial Court made reference to the High Court for extension of time for three months which time was allowed and expired on 7-9-2001. According to the counsel for the applicant there is no progress with the matter and the position is the same. In view of the above circumstances/position, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has not objection if the bail is granted to the applicant. I considered the submissions of the counsel. It is admitted position that on merits the applicant was allowed bail and thereafter absconded. The maximum punishment for offence is seven years. The trial is not likely to conclude in near future. The applicant is already in custody since 24-3-2001. The case reported in 1983 PCr.LJ 2600 is referred. In the circumstances, he is allowed bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./S-43/K???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.