1968 P Cr (PLP)
GHULAM HUSSAIN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1968 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | GHULAM HUSSAIN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions 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: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM HUSSAIN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Niaz M. Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Inayat Hussain, Attorney for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Commitment proceeding‑All evidence practically concluded‑High Court in circumstance refusing bail to accused but directing Magistrate to conclude committal proceedings within 3 weeks‑High Courts order unexceptionable‑Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 498.
Judgment & Decree
S. A. RAHMAN, J: The petitioners are accused of having participated in a murder with rioting. Their bail applications have been dismissed by the High Court and this is a petition on their behalf for special leave to appeal. The case is under enquiry before a Committing Magistrate, it appears that on the 17th June, 1967, the learned Magistrate granted bail to petitioners Manzoor and Illahi Bakhsh but on an application made by the State, the bail was cancelled on the 18th July 1967. It further appears that all the evidence has practically been concluded in the enquiry court and only the Investigating Officer remains to be examined. In these circumstances the learned Single Judge declined to grant bail to the petitioners, leaving it to the Committing Magistrate to decide within three weeks of his order whether to commit the accused to the Sessions or not. We have heard Mr. Niaz M. Siddiqi in support of the petition for special leave to appeal. In our opinion no exception can be taken to the order passed by the, High Court. No special features have been pointed out which would justify grant of bail to the petitioners at this stage. 'The petition is dismissed ??????????? Petition dismissed