2015 PLP 834 (YLR)
RAHAT SHAH — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2015 PLP 834 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Chief Court Gilgit-Baltistan |
| Bench Members | Sahib Khan, C.J. |
| Parties | RAHAT SHAH — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2015 PLP 834 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2015 PLP 834 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Chief Court Gilgit-Baltistan bench comprising: Sahib Khan, C.J..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2015 PLP 834 (YLR) (RAHAT SHAH — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Haq Nawaz for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Accused, who was sentenced to one year's R.I., had undergone one fourth of the total sentence of one year, and benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C., had also been extended to him by the Trial Court
Held, it seemed fair that accused be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bond.
Judgment & Decree
SAHIB KHAN, C.J.
Arguments heard on the application under section 426, Cr.P.C. annexed with the main appeal. Counsel for the convict/appellant states that the convict has been sentenced to one year's R.I. with 10% of Diat amount against which this appeal has been preferred and pending adjudication and an application under section 426, Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and releasing the appellant on bail is also annexed. It is pleaded that the appellant has already undergone about 50 days behind bars after arrest and about a month after conviction in the judicial lockup amounting to approximately 80 days. Counsel for the appellant also pleads that time may be consumed in the process of adjudication of appeal and by the said time the appellant may have already under gone the sentence against him. That there is no possibility of conclusion of appeal within a reasonable time. A.A.G. representing the State has been called to assist the court as the matter is at the initial motion stage. He has not been noticed as such previously to defend the matter. I feel that in the circumstances of the case as the appellant has undergone one fourth of the sentence of one year and the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. has also been extended by the trial Court. It would seem fair that the appellant may be released on bail subject to furnishing his bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 (rupees two lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Registrar Chief Court. Notice may be issued to respondent for a date in office for further proceedings on the main appeal. HBT/4/GB Bail granted.