P L D 1967 Supreme Court 293 (PLP)
ABDUR REHMAN‑Petitioner Versus FAZAL QADIM KHAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1967 Supreme Court 293 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Single Bench |
| Parties | ABDUR REHMAN‑Petitioner Versus FAZAL QADIM KHAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1967 Supreme Court 293 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1967 Supreme Court 293 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Honorable Judges.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1967 Supreme Court 293 (PLP) (ABDUR REHMAN‑Petitioner Versus FAZAL QADIM KHAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- M. Salim Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ghulam Mohyuddin, Attorney for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 20th March 1967.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 17th January 1967, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 32 of 1966). Criadnal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 497‑Cancellation of bail‑Bail before arrest confirmed by High Court of person alleged to be privy and accessory to murder‑Supreme Court refused to interfere with order of High Court holding that Court of `cession seized of case would itself in law cancel bail if there be ground for believing accused to be guilty of offence‑Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3)‑Peval Code (XLV of 1860), S..02. Respondents not represented.
Judgment & Decree
CORNELIUS, C. J.‑The petitioner Abdur Rehman seeks leave to appeal against an order of the High Court confirming bail before arrest granted to the respondents, Fazal Qadim Khan and Amanullah Khan in a case relating to the murder of his father. These two persons were not named in the initial report, but they are entered in the Police Challan, as persons privy and accessory to the murder, by the application of section 109, P. P. C. No ground can be made out at the present stage for cancellation of the bail, by this Court. Until the situation arises that there is reasonable ground for thinking that the respondents are guilty of the offence shown in the Challan, which is punishable with death or transportation for life, there would be no violation of law in allowing them to remain on bail. Mr. Q. M, Salim learned that the result of the High Court order may be that they will remain on bail throughout the commitment proceedings and the trial as well, if they are committed for trial. That apprehension is unfounded. The law is clear that a Court cannot allow any person of whose case it is seized to remain on bail if there be reasonable grounds for thinking that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or transportation for life, except on grounds of sickness or infirmity, or of age, i.e extreme youth or extreme old age, or of sex. The Committing Magistrate and if a trial follows, the Sessions Court, will in due course be in a position to determine the question of bail on this basis, and the High Court order, directing bail before arrest, will then not stand in the way. We dismiss this petition. K. B. A. Petition dismissed.