1968 SCMR 39 (PLP)
GULLU alias GUL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS — Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1968 SCMR 39 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | A. R. Cornelius, C.J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, |
| Parties | GULLU alias GUL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS — Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 SCMR 39 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 SCMR 39 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: A. R. Cornelius, C.J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 SCMR 39 (PLP) (GULLU alias GUL MUHAMMAD AND OTHERS — Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- M. B. Zaman, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Bashir Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Fazal-i-Hussain, Attorney for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi dated the 25th October 1967, in Bail Application No. 305 of 1967). Bail-Grievance that amount of bail bond fixed by High Court too excessive-Relief, held, could be obtained by moving High Court itself for purpose-Special leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.-Haji Wali Muhammad the main accused in the case was granted bail by this Court in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 with two sureties and a personal bond in the like amount. Thereafter the petitioners who are co-accused with Haji Wali Muhammad have also been granted bail by the High Court, but also in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 with two sureties and a personal bond in the like amount. It is contended that Rs. 2,00,000 was fixed as the amount of bail bond in the case of Haji Wali Muhammad as he is a wealthy merchant, but the petitioners are only fishermen and can under no circumstances manage to offer bails in the terms and conditions imposed by the High Court. The excessive amount fixed in the petitioners case is accordingly claimed to be refusal to bail to them. It appears that the basis on which Haji Wali Muhammad was allowed bail in the high sum of Rs. 2,00,000 was not brought to the notice of the High Court otherwise such a large sum would not have been fixed in the case of the petitioners. We,, however, do not consider it necessary to grant special leave to appeal as appropriate relief can be obtained by applying to the High Court for suitable reduction in the amount of the bail bond keeping in view the circumstances of the case. The petition is dismissed, Petition dismissed.