1986 PLP 1764 (MLD)
Agha MUNIR KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1764 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Javid Iqbal C.J. and Ijaz Nisar, J |
| Parties | Agha MUNIR KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1764 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1764 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Javid Iqbal C.J. and Ijaz Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1764 (MLD) (Agha MUNIR KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hasnat Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.497‑‑Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance (IX Of 1984), Ss.4 a (6)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.409, 420, 468 471‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Total sum alleged to have been embezzled by accused was Rs.25,192‑‑Handwriting.Fxpert's report awaited‑‑Conclusion of trial, held, might take long time‑‑interim bail already allowed confirmed in circumstances. Sardar Nazar Husain Dogar for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S.497‑‑Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance (IX Of 1984), Ss.4 a (6)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.409, 420, 468 471‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Total sum alleged to have been embezzled by accused was Rs.25,192‑‑Handwriting.Fxpert's report awaited‑‑Conclusion of trial, held, might take long time‑‑interim bail already allowed confirmed in circumstances. Hasnat Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Sardar Nazar Husain Dogar for the State. 23‑12‑1985 record has not yet been received. We have asked the learned counsel for the State to produce the record on the next date of hearing which is 19‑1‑1986 In the meantime the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.30,000 (thirty thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C. , Wazirabad. JAVID IQBAL, C.J.‑‑In continuation of our order, dated 23‑12‑1985 the total sum which is alleged to have been embezzled be the petitioner is Rs:25,
192. The Handwriting Expert's report is still awaited. It may take a long time for the conclusion of the trial. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the interim bail allowed to the petitioner should be confirmed on his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.60.000 instead of Rs.30,000 with two sureties each in .the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C., Wazirabad. Order accordingly. This petition is disposed of. H.A.K Bail allowed.