1987 PLP 2251 (MLD)
RASOOLZADA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 2251 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Abdul Razzak A.Thahim, J |
| Parties | RASOOLZADA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 2251 (MLD)?
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 1987 PLP 2251 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Abdul Razzak A.Thahim, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 2251 (MLD) (RASOOLZADA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.497--Bail--Delay in trial--Accused involved in case of Heroin- Co-accused had been getting adjournments for protracting proceedings with a view to pass statutory period--Accused, held, not entitled to grant of bail.
S.497(5)--Bail, cancellation of--Co-accused who was granted bail by Court below misused his liberty and tried to protract proceedings- Court below, held, would be at liberty to consider cancellation of bail in case accused was not prepared to proceed with case. 1983 S C M R 427 and 1984 S C M R 613 ref. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed for Applicant. A.R. Kazi,Addl. A.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S.497(5)--Bail, cancellation of--Co-accused who was granted bail by Court below misused his liberty and tried to protract proceedings- Court below, held, would be at liberty to consider cancellation of bail in case accused was not prepared to proceed with case. 1983 S C M R 427 and 1984 S C M R 613 ref. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed for Applicant. A.R. Kazi,Addl. A.-G. for the State. This bail application is pressed by Mr. Khawaja on the ground of delay in trial. It is contended by the learned counsel that applicant is not responsible for delay and he has remained in jail for about 15 months therefore he is entitled to bail. He has referred to the case reported in 1983 S C M R 427 and 1984 S C M R 613. Mr.A.R.Kazi learned Addl. A.G. has opposed the bail on the ground that during the pendency of the case one accused Abdul Manan escaped from the custody and other accused who was granted bail has tried to protract the proceeding with a view that after the statutory period is over co-accused be released on bail. This is a case in which 14 K.G. heroin is involved and bail application of applicant was dismissed on merits. It is apparent than co-accused Gul Khan has been seeking adjournment and it is regretted that learned Sessions Judge allowed such adjournments. He could have easily refused the adjournment and proceeded the trial. The offence is serious one and business of Heroin has become common and this business is being done by the hardend, desparate and p dangerous persons therefore the amendment has been brought in proviso 3 of Section 497 Cr.P.C. and bail can be refused and learned Sessions Judge has stated in the order that the offence for which the applicant is charged is serious one. In my view he has rightly exercised his discretion against the applicant. Applicant is not entitled to bail. His bail application is dismissed. Gul Khan has been granted bail and it appears that he has misused his liberty and protracting the proceeding. The learned Sessions Judge is at liberty to consider cancellation in case applicant is not prepared to proceed with the case. He can do so without r making any information to this Court. M.Y.H./R-25/K Bail refused.