1968 P Cr (PLP)
NOOR SAMAND‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1968 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court |
| Bench Members | Fazal-e-Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ |
| Parties | NOOR SAMAND‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court bench comprising: Fazal-e-Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (NOOR SAMAND‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Aftab Farrukh, Advocate Supreme Count instructed by M. Serjees Nagi, Attorney for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 13th March 1968.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Vest Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 15th January 1968, in Criminal Revision No. 1411 of 1967). Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 497 & 213‑--Order committing accused to stand trial‑
Would constitute sufficient ground for refusing or cancelling bail. Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure lays down that an accused person shall not be granted bail if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or transportation for life. No genera, rule can be laid down in this behalf; for the determination whether reasonable grounds appear for such a belief will depend on the facts of each case. It can, however, be said that barring an exceptional case an order committing an accused person under Chapter XVIII to stand trial for the commission of an offence punishable with death or transportation for life would constitute sufficient ground for refusing or cancelling bail. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J: It is urged by Mr. Aftab Farrukh that a charge under section 210 (Chapter XVIII) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is formed by ‑ the Inquiry Magistrate on satisfaction that there .are sufficient grounds for committing the accused for trial while under section 254 (Chapter XIX) a charge is framed if the trial Magistrate is on recording evidence for the prosecution and examination of the accused of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence. On the distinction the learned counsel maintained that the trial Judge had in cancelling the petitioner's bail erred in assuming that a prima facie case, was made out against him. Section; 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure laid down that an accused person shall not be granted bail if there appears reason?able grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or transportation for life. No general rule can be laid down in this behalf for the determination whether reasonable grounds appear for such a belief will depend on the facts of each case. It can, however, be said that barring an exceptional case an order committing an accused person under Chapter XVIII to stand trial for the commission of an offence punishable with death or transportation for life would constitute sufficient ground for refusing or cancelling bail. In this view the Sessions Judge has acted properly in cancelling the bail granted to the petitioner at an earlier stage. The petition is dismissed. Leave refused.