1983 P Cr (PLP)
Haji MUHAMMAD ANWAR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1983 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | Haji MUHAMMAD ANWAR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 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 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 P Cr (PLP) (Haji MUHAMMAD ANWAR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawaja A. Waheed for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑S. 497‑Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss. 18 & 22‑Peti tioner released on interim bail and continuously in judicial lockup after re‑arrest‑Question whether Ss. 18 & 22 of Emigration Ordinance, 1979 attracted in case requiring consideration at trial
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2310‑B of 1981, decided on 29th August, 1981. ‑‑S. 497‑Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss. 18 & 22‑Peti tioner released on interim bail and continuously in judicial lockup after re‑arrest‑Question whether Ss. 18 & 22 of Emigration Ordinance, 1979 attracted in case requiring consideration at trial
Bail allowed. Khawaja A. Waheed for Petitioner. Yasin Kazi for the State. This is a bail application of Haji Muhammad Anwar in a case under section 420, P. P. C., Passport Act, 1974 and Emigration Ordinance, 1979 registered at P. S. F. I. A. vide F. I. R. No. 154 of 1980. The prosecution case against the petitioner is that on 29th November, 1980 the Inspector Incharge Passport Cell raided the premises of the petitioner and recovered 103 passports and other documents from his attache case. It is alleged that the petitioner received from various persons an amount of Rs. 2,50,
000. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offences under sections 18 and 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 are not attracted to the case of the petitioner inasmuch as the main ingredients of sections 18 and 22 are lacking. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties 1 find that the petitioner was arrested on 29th November, 1980, released on interim bail and then re‑arrested on 16th December, 1980 and is continuously in the judicial lock‑up. The question whether sections 18 and 22 of the Emigra tion Ordinance, 1979 stand attracted to the peculiar facts and circumstances A of the case needs consideration and requires further inquiry. In the circumstances, the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties to the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Rawalpindi. H.Y.M. Bail granted.