PCRLJ 1994

1994 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus ILYAS alias ILYASA and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2ndNovember, 1993
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1994 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus ILYAS alias ILYASA and another — Respondents
Primary Law (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus ILYAS alias ILYASA and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Syed AI-Mustafa Imam for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497(1), 3rd & 4th provisos

Opinion of the Court in depriving the accused of the concession of 3rd proviso to S.497, Cr.P.C. cannot be subjective but must be based upon material placed before the Court reasonably supporting the conclusion that the accused was a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal.

S. 497(5)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34

Bail, cancellation of-- Prosecution had not, placed before the Trial Court any material showing the accused to be desperate, dangerous or hardened criminals

Accused till then were not even reported to have been convicted in any case

Trial Court, thus, had rightly exercised its discretion in releasing the accused on bail on statutory ground

Cancellation of bail was declined accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

Dil Muhammad Tarar for the Complainant. A.H. Masud for the State. Date of hearing: 2nd November, 1993. This is an application for the cancellation of bail of Ilyas alias Ilyasa and Zaka Ullah alias Yousi granted to them by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala on 4-1-1992 in a case under section 302/34, P.P.C.

2. The prosecution case is that on 12-10-1989 the respondents killed Shafqat Iqbal deceased, a Police Constable with fire-arms on the suspicion of informing the police about the dealing in narcotics trade.

3. The respondents were arrested on 27-10-1989 and were granted bail on 4-1-1992 on the statutory ground i.e. non-conclusion of the trial within a period of two years of their detention.

4. The concession is sought on the ground that the respondents were desperate, dangerous and hardened criminals and thus were not entitled to the concession of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents has seriously contested the application, according to him, there was no material before the learned trial Court at the time of the grant of bail that the respondents were dangerous, desperate and hardened criminals. Their involvement in cases subsequent to enlargement on bail will not provide a ground for the cancellation of their bail for the reason that the learned trial Court had properly exercised its discretion in their favour.

6. In order to deprive the concession of 3rd proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C., an accused "in the opinion of the Court" should be hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal such opinion cannot be subjective but must be based upon material placed before the Court reasonably supporting the conclusion that the person concerned is a criminal of the classes described. In the present case, no such material was placed before the learned trial Court by the prosecution or by the petitioner that the respondents were desperate, dangerous or hardened criminals. They are not even reported to have been convicted in any case till this date.

7. In this view of the matter, the learned trial Court had rightly exercised its discretion in releasing them on bail on, the statutory ground. No case for interference is made out. The petition is accordingly dismissed. N.H.Q./M-1497/L Petition dismissed.