1983 PLP 123 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ALI AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1983 PLP 123 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ALI AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 PLP 123 (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 1983 PLP 123 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 PLP 123 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ALI AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Afzal Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing : 20th June, 1982.
- Muhammad Afzal Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court with Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order of the Lahore High Court dated 1-6-1982, passed in Cr. Appeal No. 275 of 1982). -- S. 514-Bond, forfeiture of-Accused absconding and amount of bail bond of his sureties ordered to be forfeited-Notice to show cause against such forfeiture issued to petitioners' sureties but they failed to appear in Court-Proceedings for recovery of amount taken and petitioners ordered to be sent to civil prison for six months- Order for attachment and sale of petitioners' immovable property also passed later on-Revision petition praying for reduction of amount dismissed by High Court-No flaw existing in reasons recorded by High Court while dismissing revision, leave to appeal declined Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3). Memo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑The petitioners seek Leave to Appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, dated 1‑6‑1982, dismissing their revision petition.
2. Muhammad Ali and Madad Ali petitioners stood surety for Ali Muhammad son of Muhammad Bakhsh who was ascused of an offence under section 302/34, P. P. C., and executed bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 25, each on 25‑6‑1980. The said accused, however, jumped the bail and ab sconded. His bail was therefore, cancelled and the amount of bonds ordered to be forfeited. A show‑cause notice was issued to the petitioners to show cause as to why the said amount should not be recovered from them but they failed to appear in the Court. Proceedings were, therefore, taken for recovery of the aforementioned amount and were also ordered to be sent to civil prison for a period of 6 months. Ultimately, the learned Additional Sessions Judge passed an order on 3‑5‑1981, for attachment and sale of their immovable property.. The petitioners filed a revision petition before the High Court for reduction of the amount. The revision was, however, dismissed in limine by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned order.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the impugned order. We find no flaw in the reasons recorded by the learned Judge in Chamber while dismissing the petitioners' revi sion petition and do not, therefore, consider this to be a fit case for grant of leave. The petition is consequently dismissed. Petition dismissed.