1985 PLP 909 (SCMR)
KHADIM‑‑Petitioner Versus HASAN and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 909 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ |
| Parties | KHADIM‑‑Petitioner Versus HASAN and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 909 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 909 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 909 (SCMR) (KHADIM‑‑Petitioner Versus HASAN and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Sh. Ijaz Ali,
- Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 27th May, 1984.
- Aftab Farrakh, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Masud Akhtar,
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order of the Lahore High Court Lahore, dated 22‑12‑1982, passed in Crl. Misc. 3115‑B/1982). ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.497(5)‑‑Bail‑ Cancellation‑‑Prosecution evidence in case already recorded and case fixed for arguments‑‑Case not found fit for interference with grant of bail to accused respondents‑‑Leave to appeal refused. Aftab Farrakh, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Masud Akhtar,
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High A Court, dated 22‑12‑1982, with a view to get the bail of respondents 1 to 9 cancelled.
2. The respondents are accused alongwith some other, inter alia, of offence under section 302/149, P.P.C., for the murder of Zahoor Hussain real brother of Khadim Hussain complainant.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to our notice that the respondents on the person of the deceased inflicted about 50 injuries.
4. We are surprised that bail has been granted to the respondents in such a case, but we refrain from interfering because the learned counsel for the State has informed us that the trial of this case has already commenced the prosecution evidence has been recorded and case is now fixed for arguments on the 3rd of June, 1984. In this view of the matter the petition is dismissed. S . Q Petition dismissed.