1969 P Cr (PLP)
HAQ NAWAZ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1969 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court |
| Bench Members | Single Bench |
| Parties | HAQ NAWAZ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1969 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1969 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court bench comprising: Honorable Judges.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1969 P Cr (PLP) (HAQ NAWAZ‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Raja Mahmood Akhtar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 13th December 1968.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 3rd October 1968, in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5118 of 1968). Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3) and Criminal Procedure Cods (V of 1898), S. 497‑Bail‑Supreme Court does not unduly intervene in matters of bail‑Accused in first instance should approach Inquiry Magistrate for proper action and necessary orders. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3) and Criminal Procedure Cods (V of 1898), S. 497‑Bail‑Supreme Court does not unduly intervene in matters of bail‑Accused in first instance should approach Inquiry Magistrate for proper action and necessary orders. Raja Mahmood Akhtar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioner. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing : 13th December 1968. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.‑This Petition for Special Leave to Appeal relates to the petitioner's bail in a murder case. He was arrested on the 28th of July 1968 on the charge of having abetted the murder of the deceased Zahoor Ali by his wife Mst. Alam Khatoon. The petitioner moved the High Court for his bail under section 498, Cr. P. C., which was dismissed by one sentence order saying, "No grounds for bail. Dismissed". No reason is disclosed why the petitioner approached the High Court directly for his bail without having, in the first instance, resorted to the Inquiry Magistrate and the Sessions Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the cryptic order of the learned Single Judge in the High Court does not show that he had applied his mind to the question of the petitioner's bail. It may be so, but in the absence of any material before us we are not able to judge the nature of the petitioner's crime or the proof by which it is supported even for the matter of his bail. It is not the practice of this Court to unduly intervene in bail matters, which should ordinarily be left to the discretion of the courts inquiring into the guilt of the accused person. The discretion has, of course, to be exercised on sound judicial principles. If the petitioner is advised that a case for his bail can be made out he may move the learned Inquiry Magistrate under section 497, Cr. P. C., for proper action and necessary orders. This petition is dismissed. Leave refused.