1999 PLP 131 (SCMR)
RIZWAN HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1999 PLP 131 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mamoon Kazi and Wajihuddin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | RIZWAN HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 131 (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 1999 PLP 131 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mamoon Kazi and Wajihuddin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 131 (SCMR) (RIZWAN HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 7th August, 1998.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the High Court of Sindh dated 3-7-1998 passed in Criminal Bail No.460/98).
S. 497(l), third & fourth provisos
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S. 17(3)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Bail on the ground of statutory delay
High Court being not oblivious of the high incidence of cases of car-snatching in the city, had rightly invoked the fourth proviso to S.497(l), Cr.P.C. while rejecting the bail application of accused
Leave to appeal was refused to accused accordingly. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MAMOON KAZI, J.
The petitioner is facing charges under section 17(3) of Offences Against Proper (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, before the Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South. It may be pointed out that First Information Report was lodged on 7-8-1996 at 11-00 a.m. at Police Station North Nazimabad regarding snatching of a Suzuki High-roof motor car from its owner by two persons who were said to be armed with T. T. pistols. On the next day at about I 1 -00 hours, five persons including the petitioner were involved in an encounter with police and the said car is said to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Therefore, a case under section 17(3) of the said Ordinance was registered at the said police station against him. The petitioner filed his bail application invoking the third proviso to section 497(l), Cr.P.C. on the ground of delay in the conclusion of his trial. The bail application was, however, dismissed as the petitioner was found to be involved in car snatching which was an offence of heinous nature. The petitioner's bail application filed before the High Court has also been dismissed on the same ground. We find that the order passed by the learned Judge in Chambers is not open to exception. The learned Judge in the High Court obviously could not be oblivious of the high incidence of cases of car-snatching in the city of Karachi. Therefore, in our opinion, he rightly invoked the fourth proviso to section 497(1) while rejecting the petitioner's bail application. The petition is, therefore, dismissed and leave is refused. N.H.Q./R-28/S Leave refused.