1968 PLP 49 (SCMR)
MIR AFSAR AND OTHERS — Petitioner Versus THE SATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1968 PLP 49 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 498-Bail-High Court granting bail to two accused respectively charged to have fired shots in the air and abused complainant's brother but refusing bail to others charged to have fired at witnesses and seriously injured them-Cases of two sets of accused, held, clearly distinguishable and exercise of discretion by High Court quite proper. p. 504 |
| Bench Members | A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, J |
| Parties | MIR AFSAR AND OTHERS — Petitioner Versus THE SATE-Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 PLP 49 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 PLP 49 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 498-Bail-High Court granting bail to two accused respectively charged to have fired shots in the air and abused complainant's brother but refusing bail to others charged to have fired at witnesses and seriously injured them-Cases of two sets of accused, held, clearly distinguishable and exercise of discretion by High Court quite proper. p. 504 bench comprising: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 PLP 49 (SCMR) (MIR AFSAR AND OTHERS — Petitioner Versus THE SATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- lftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Wajid Hussain, Senior Attorney for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 25th October 1967, in Criminal Misc. No. 1 of 1967/ Criminal Revision No. 1053 of 1967). Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 498-Bail-High Court granting bail to two accused respectively charged to have fired shots in the air and abused complainant's brother but refusing bail to others charged to have fired at witnesses and seriously injured them-Cases of two sets of accused, held, clearly distinguishable and exercise of discretion by High Court quite proper. [p. 50]4 Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.-The petitioners stand convicted under section 307/149 and section 148, P. P. C. for forming an unlawful assembly and in the prosecution of its common object injuring three prosecution witnesses with fire arms. The High Court has on a further revision granted bail to two of the co-accused of the petitioners one of whom bad tired shots in air and the other bad only abused a brother of the complainant. Bail to the petitioners has, however, been refused because they were found to have tired at three of the P. Ws., and caused serious injuries to them. It is said that the discrimination made by the High Court' among the petitioners and their co-accused has resulted in failure of justice. The contention is plainly misconceived. The case of , the petitioners and the other two was clearly distinguishable and the High Court has exercised its discretion under section 426 and 498, Cr. P. C., quite properly in refusing bail to the petitioners pending the disposal of their revision petition. The petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.