1992 PLP 1753 (SCMR)
SAKHI DOST MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1992 PLP 1753 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah, Actg. CJ., Shafiur Rahman |
| Parties | SAKHI DOST MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP 1753 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP 1753 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, Actg. CJ., Shafiur Rahman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP 1753 (SCMR) (SAKHI DOST MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- K.M.A. Samdani, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 3rd May, 1992.
- Ch. M. Farooq, Deputy Advocate‑General, Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, Deputy Advocate‑General, Riaz Ahmed, Standing Counsel, Raja M. Afsar Ali (for Government of Balochistan) and Yakub K. Eusafzai, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order, dated 15‑5‑1991 passed by the Balochistan High Court in Criminal Bail Application No. 114 of 1991). ‑‑‑‑5.497‑‑‑Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3, 4 & 26‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑-Contraband items were recovered after a long time ‑‑‑Challan had already been submitted and the trial had not yet started‑‑‑Accused had not misused the concession of bail granted by the Sessions. Judge‑‑‑Order of High Court rejecting the bail to accused was set aside by Supreme Court and interim bail earlier granted to accused by Supreme Court was confirmed. Ch. M. Farooq, Deputy Advocate‑General, Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, Deputy Advocate‑General, Riaz Ahmed, Standing Counsel, Raja M. Afsar Ali (for Government of Balochistan) and Yakub K. Eusafzai, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
(On appeal from the order, dated 15‑5‑1991 passed by the Balochistan High Court in Criminal Bail Application No. 114 of 1991). ‑‑‑‑5.497‑‑‑Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3, 4 & 26‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑-Contraband items were recovered after a long time ‑‑‑Challan had already been submitted and the trial had not yet started‑‑‑Accused had not misused the concession of bail granted by the Sessions. Judge‑‑‑Order of High Court rejecting the bail to accused was set aside by Supreme Court and interim bail earlier granted to accused by Supreme Court was confirmed. K.M.A. Samdani, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant. Ch. M. Farooq, Deputy Advocate‑General, Ch. Ijaz Ahmed, Deputy Advocate‑General, Riaz Ahmed, Standing Counsel, Raja M. Afsar Ali (for Government of Balochistan) and Yakub K. Eusafzai, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State. Date of hearing: 3rd May, 1992. ABDUL OADEER CHAUDHRY, J: ‑‑This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment of the High Court, dated 15‑5‑1991 whereby the appellant's application for bait was rejected.
2. The facts of the case are that according to the report lodged on 5‑1‑1991 the Director, Narcotics Control Board searched the house belonging to the appellant and others in Village Chighazi and recovered 300 Kilograms opium, acetic acid, carbic acid and some other chemicals for manufacturing herein. The final report has been submitted before the Sessions Judge for trial. The High Court refused to admit the appellant to bail on the ground that Col. Shafiq and Col. Usman have attributed the recovery from the house belonging to the appellant. Here, it may be pointed out that about an incident which had occurred on 10‑10‑1990 a report had been lodged on 12‑10‑1990 and in that report it was stated that Killi Sakhi Dost Jan was searched and arms, ammunition and narcotics were recovered. Again a search was made on 5‑1‑1992 when the entire area was under the control of Kharan Rifles.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the contraband articles were recovered after such a long time when the appellant had no access to the area needs further inquiry. The challan has already been submitted and the trial has not yet started. There is no allegation that the appellant has misused the concession of bail. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the order of the High Court. The appellant was admitted to interim bail by this Court on 19‑6‑1991. The interim bail is confirmed. M.BA./S‑691/S Bail confirmed.