1993 P Cr (PLP)
MUJAHID ALI — Petitioner Versus SALAMAT ALI and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1993 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUJAHID ALI — Petitioner Versus SALAMAT ALI and 2 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 P Cr (PLP) (MUJAHID ALI — Petitioner Versus SALAMAT ALI and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Dr. Mian Muhammad Yousaf for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Riaz Nagra for Respondents Nos.l and 2.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.302
Cancellation-- One of the accused persons who was released on bail, had misbehaved even with Trial Court as a result of which Court requested for transfer of case from his Court
Accused had not riled counter-affidavit denying allegations against him
Bail granted to accused was cancelled, in circumstances as he misused concession of bail.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Muhammad Riaz Nagra for Respondents Nos.l and
2. Abdul Khaliq for the State. Date of hearing: 27th November, 1991. This is an application for the concellation of bail of Salamat Ali and Zahid alias Zahid Rashid granted to them by this Court on 24-3-1991.
2. The prosecution case is that the respondents alongwith 3 others committed the murder of Muhammad Akram deceased with fire-arms on 30-4-1990. The prosecution version is that on 30-4-1990 the deceased alongwith his' father and others was nearing his car after condoling the death of Muhammad Sadiq's wife when the respondents and their companions attacked the deceased with fire-arms resulting in his death.
3. The respondents were granted bail on the grounds that they had been found innocent by the local police, local D.S.P. and D.S.P., Samundari and that no motive was attributed to them and further that only ineffective firing was attributed to Salamat Ali while Zahid alias Zahid Rashid had allegedly fired at the deceased when he had fallen injured.
4. Cancellation is sought on the grounds that the respondents had been found guilty by the S.P., Range Crimes who had recommended to challan them and further that the respondents are misusing the concession of bail and threatened the P.Ws. About Salamat Ali respondent it is stated that he had misbehaved even with the trial Court as a result of which the Court requested for the transfer of the case from his Court. Bashir Ahmad and Ghulam Mohy- ud-Din have lodged reports with the police to the above effect.
5. The respondents have denied the allegations. Zahid Rashid has riled a counter-affidavit denying the aforementioned allegations.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account all the circumstances I am of the view that Salamat Ali is not entitled to remain on bail because he reportedly misbehaved with the trial Court. He has not even cared to file a counter-affidavit. Accordingly I cancel his bail. However, the application is dismissed to the extent of Zahid alias Zahid Rashid because he has filed a counter-affidavit denying the allegations levelled by the witnesses and there is no such report that he had misbehaved with the trial Court. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the case within a month. H.B.T./M-1095/L Order accordingly,