1985 PLP 97 (SCMR)
BAKHTA and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1985 PLP 97 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ |
| Parties | BAKHTA and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 97 (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 97 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah and M.S.H. Quraishi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 97 (SCMR) (BAKHTA and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zafar Pasha Ch., Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 21-5-84 of the Lahore High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1968/B of 1983).
Art.185 (3)--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.497 (5)--Cancel lation of bail--Leave to appeal by petitioners challenging order of cancel lation of bail without surrendering themselves, and seeking bail before arrest from Supreme Court--Held, since petitioners had not surrendered themselves in pursuance of order of High Court, petition could be, heard only if they surrendered themselves before Supreme Court- Petitioners not surrendering themselves on two dates--Further adjourn ment of case refused and petition dismissed. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Zafar Pasha Ch., Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 13th June, 1984. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.--The learned Judge of the High Court, by his order dated 21-5-1984, cancelled the bail allowed to the petitioners herein by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang, and directed that they shall be taken into custody forthwith. The petitioners, without surrendering themselves, filed this petition for leave to appeal challenging the said order and seeking bail before arrest from this Court. As the petitioners had not surrendered themselves in pursuance of the order of the High Court, the petition could be heard only if they surrendered themselves before this Court. When this case camp up for hearing on the first occasion, the petitioners were not present and their learned counsel sought adjournment on the ground that he could not inform the petitioners of the date of hearing, for which reason they could not be present before the Court. Accordingly, the case was adjourned for today. The petitioners are however not present before the Court even today and counsel again prays for adjournment. We are not inclined to again adjourn the case. In the circumstances noted above, this petition cannot be heard. It is, therefore, dismissed hereby. M . Z . M . Petition dismised.