PCRLJ 1968

1968 P Cr (PLP)

MEHRAJ DIN‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court
Decided Date
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 142 of 1966, decided on 18th December 1967.
Honorable Judges
Hamoodur Rahman and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1968 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Supreme Court
Bench Members Hamoodur Rahman and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
Parties MEHRAJ DIN‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF AND OTHERS‑Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 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 1968 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court bench comprising: Hamoodur Rahman and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (MEHRAJ DIN‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF AND OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • ‑‑Amjad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Inayat Hussain, Attorney for Petitioner.
  • Nazir Ahmad Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney for Respondents Nos. 1‑5.
  • Date of hearing: 18th December 1967.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 12th May 1966, in Criminal Revision No. 502 of 1964.)

S. 497‑Bail application pending appeal to Supreme CourtGrounds urged in support of application for bail going into merits of acquittal appealSupreme Court would not, for obvious reasons, examine such grounds --Application for bail dismissed. Sheikh Bashir Ahmad, Additional Advocate‑General (Nemat Khan, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Ijaz Ali Attorney for the State.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑The grounds urged in support of the application for bail go to the merits of the acquittal appeal. For obvious reasons we are not prepared to examine those grounds at this stage. The application for bail on behalf of Latif and Shaukat Ali respondents is dismissed, but Muhammad Sharif, respondent, is allowed to remain on parole already granted to him by the Borstal Jail authorities.