1989 P Cr (PLP)
Before Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Before Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (Before Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 58 & 498‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 307, 147, 148 & 149‑ Protective bail‑‑Accused a well‑known person seriously apprehending arrest by police if he went to competent Court for bail‑‑Accused had filed affidavit for which there was no reason to disbelieve‑‑Police having powers to arrest any person under S.58, Cr. P. C. accused was allowed bail for 20 days to approach competent Court in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
S.M. Zafar with Raja Haq Nawaz for Applicant. A.H. Lakho, A.‑G. for the State. This is an application for protective bail on behalf of Yar Muhammad Rind against whom the case under sections 302, 307, 147,148 and 149, P.P.C. has been registered on 26th May, 1987 at Police Station Dhadar, District Kachhi, Baluchistan. I have heard Mr. S.M. Zafar. It is contended by the learned counsel that applicant is a respectable person and it is not possible for him to enter in Baluchistan and apply for bail before arrest. He has argued that this Court has got the jurisdiction and reliance has been placed on 1973 P Cr. L J 661, Pakistan Law Journal 1981 Cr. Cases 312 and 2 unreported orders of the Lahore High Court in Applications Nos. 2485 of 1989 and 1692 of 1982. He has also referred to the cases reported in 1975 Kar. 628 and P L D 1975 SC 62. It is submitted by the learned counsel that in the same case in exercise of the criminal jurisdiction, High Court Baluchistan has also granted bail to the co‑accused. In support, photo copy of the order dated 20‑6‑1989 has been produced. Mr. A.H. Lakho, A: G. has opposed the prayer on the ground that no case has been made out for imminent danger of arrest. He has submitted that in the light of the authorities cited by the learned counsel, the Court has got the jurisdiction to consider the protective bail. This is an application for only protection so as to move the Competent Court for anticipatory bail. The applicant in para. 12 has submitted as under:‑ "That the applicant is well‑known person and he seriously apprehends that he shall not only be arrested by the police in this concocted case if he enters Baluchistan but he will be humiliated, tortured and harassed, and therefore, protection of this Honourable Court is being sought, in the interest of justice. The local police here has also been alerted and thus they are after the applicant. The applicant cannot enter his own residence even in Karachi." Lie has also filed an affidavit and in para. 4 of the affidavit he has clearly stated that he will be arrested by Baluchistan Police at Karachi in any moment being well‑known personality and it is not possible for him to enter in Baluchistan to approach the Sessions Court and the High Court. In case of Muhammad Amin v. The State reported in 1973 P Cr. L J 661, the applicant moved this Court when case was registered at Gulberg Police Station Lahore and protective bail was granted. In case of Chowdhry Allahditta v. The State reported in 1981 P Cr. L J 1047 the non‑bailable warrants were issued by the Assistant Commissioner Baluchistan even then the Lahore High Court granted protective bail to the accused. In this case revision application under section 24 of the Criminal Law (Special Provisions) Ordinance II was also filed before the Baluchistan High Court and co‑accused have been granted bail by an order dated 20‑6‑1989. However, I do not want to enter into the controversy of the case and touch merits of the case, but only to say that under section 58 of the Cr. P. C. Police can arrest any accused in Pakistan and to that extent affidavit has been filed and I have no reason to disbelieve the affidavit in these circumstances. The applicant is admitted to protective bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court to enable the applicant to approach the Competent Court of Law in accordance with law upto 31‑7‑1989. The applicant shall not be arrested till 31st July. 1989. MA.K./Y‑36/K Bail allowed.