1983 P Cr (PLP)
DR. MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1983 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | DR. MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
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 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 P Cr (PLP) (DR. MUHAMMAD BASHIR‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Aslam Khan Buttar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 497‑‑Bail‑Petitioner allowed bail by Additional Sessions Judge but trial Court issuing non‑bailable warrants for his arrest‑Contention that petitioner not served with notice of appearance as such issuance of non‑bailable warrants not justified‑State Counsel; not controverting such fact‑Bail allowed. Ch. Muhammad Mansha for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑ S. 497‑‑Bail‑Petitioner allowed bail by Additional Sessions Judge but trial Court issuing non‑bailable warrants for his arrest‑Contention that petitioner not served with notice of appearance as such issuance of non‑bailable warrants not justified‑State Counsel; not controverting such fact‑Bail allowed. Muhammad Aslam Khan Buttar for Petitioner. Ch. Muhammad Mansha for the State. This is an application for pre‑arrest bail in a case under section 4091 420/468/471, P. P. C. and section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, registered at Police Station, Rajana vide F. I. R. No. 32 dated 13th May, 1981. The allegations against the petitioner are that he forged some degrees.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioner was allowed bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad on 1st March; 1976 in this case, but the trial Court, has issued non‑bail able warrants for his arrest in this case. Learned counsel submits that there was no justification for the issuance of non‑bailable warrants for the reason that petitioner was not served with a notice to appear on 20th July, 1981.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State is not in a position to controvert this factual aspect of the matter. The petitioner assures that he will not absent himself in future. In the circumstances the pre- arrest bail already allowed to him is confirmed. M.Y.M. Bail granted