1978 PLP 248 (SCMR)
SEER ZAMAN-Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AZAD AND ANOTHER-Respondents
| Citation | 1978 PLP 248 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ----Ss. 497 41.498-Bail-Reason given by High Court for grant of bails Petitioner in jail for 28 months and no likelihood of his trial for a year and three months-Discretion exercised by High Court for releasing accused on bail, held neither illegal nor perverse, hence, not liable to be set aside.-Delay. |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SEER ZAMAN-Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AZAD AND ANOTHER-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1978 PLP 248 (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 1978 PLP 248 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ----Ss. 497 41.498-Bail-Reason given by High Court for grant of bails Petitioner in jail for 28 months and no likelihood of his trial for a year and three months-Discretion exercised by High Court for releasing accused on bail, held neither illegal nor perverse, hence, not liable to be set aside.-Delay. bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1978 PLP 248 (SCMR) (SEER ZAMAN-Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AZAD AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, Advocate and M. A. Sirldiqi, Advocate-one Record for Petitioner.
- Agha Aziz Ahmad, Advocate for Respondent No. 1.
- Date of hearing: 29th Marsh 1978.
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, Advocate and M. A. Sirldiqi, Advocate‑one Record for Petitioner.
- After hearing Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Agha Aziz Ahmad, learned Advocate for Muhammad Azad respondent No. 1 we have come to the conclusion that there is no merit in this petition. The discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge in the High Court for releasing the accused on bail cannot be said to be illegal or perverse in view of the authority reported in P L D 1977 S C 480. Under the circumstances this petition is therefore dismissed.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the older of the Lahore High Court dated the 19th of December 1977 on Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4623/8 of 1977),
Ss. 497 41.498-Bail-Reason given by High Court for grant of bails Petitioner in jail for 28 months and no likelihood of his trial for a year and three months-Discretion exercised by High Court for releasing accused on bail, held neither illegal nor perverse, hence, not liable to be set aside.-[Delay]. Riasat Ali v. State P L D 1977 S C 480 ref. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, Advocate and M. A. Sirldiqi, Advocate‑one Record for Petitioner. Agha Aziz Ahmad, Advocate for Respondent No.
1. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 29th Marsh 1978. QAISAR KHAN, J.‑On the 12th of August 1975 at about 7 a. m. Saudagar was fired upon and injured on his leg in his field in village Gunj of the Chauntra Police Station of Rawalpindi Tehsil. His son Sher Zaman reported the matter the same day at 7 p.m. in Police Station Chauntra distant 6 miles from the spot charging Muhammad Azad for firing at his father Saudagar. A case under section 307 of the Pakistan Penal Code was registered. Muhammad Azad was arrested in this case. Saudagar expired in the hospital on the 19th of October 1975 and the case registered was altered to one under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code. Muhammad Azad accused approached the Court of Session for bail but his petition was dismissed. He then approached the High Court twice for his release on bail but his petitions were dismissed on merits. For the third time he again approached the High Court for his release on bail and a learned Single Judge by his order dated the 19th of February 1972 admitted him to bail. The reason given by the learned Judge was that the petitioner had been in jail for 28 months and that there was no likelihood of his trial for a year and three months. Sher Zaman the complainant has filed this petition for special leave to appeal against the aforesaid order of the High Court requesting for cancellation of the bail' After hearing Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Agha Aziz Ahmad, learned Advocate for Muhammad Azad respondent No. 1 we have come to the conclusion that there is no merit in this petition. The discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge in the High Court for releasing the accused on bail cannot be said to be illegal or perverse in view of the authority reported in P L D 1977 S C
480. Under the circumstances this petition is therefore dismissed. Petition dismissed.