PCRLJ 1989

1989 P Cr (PLP)

FARZAND ALI and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3631/B of 1988, decided on 28th November, 1988.
Honorable Judges
Rustam S. Sidhwa, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Rustam S. Sidhwa, J
Parties FARZAND ALI and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 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 1989 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rustam S. Sidhwa, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (FARZAND ALI and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

Representation

  • Ch. Rafiq Ahmad Bajwa for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Cross: cases between parties‑‑High Court having ordered to proceed in other case‑‑Case against accused lying in suspense and not likely to conclude for quite some time‑ Accused behind bars for more than two years‑‑Accused allowed bail in circumstances. Sana Ullah Hashmat for the Complainant. Aftab Sherazi for the State.

Judgment & Decree

Ch. Rafiq Ahmad Bajwa for Petitioners. Sana Ullah Hashmat for the Complainant. Aftab Sherazi for the State. This is a petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. by Farzand Ali and Muhammad Asghar, petitioners, for bail in respect of a case instituted against them and two others under section 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Kassowal, District Sahiwal on 15‑5‑1986.

2. Bail is pressed on the ground that though the petitioners were arrested on 20‑6‑1986, no charge has yet been framed and the trial is not likely to conclude till another six months.

3. On behalf of the complainant, it is submitted that since the petitioners moved a transfer petition, therefore, the case has been delayed and the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail.

4. It appears that there are two cross‑cases between the parties and under the direction of this Court, the other case has been ordered to be heard and disposed of first, with the result that the present case is lying in suspense. Since the petitioners have been behind the bars from 20‑6‑1986 and the trial of the present case is not likely to conclude for quite some time, the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail.

5. For the foreging reasons, this petition is accepted and Farzand Ali and Muhammad Asghar, petitioners, are released on bail, subject to their furnishing security in the sum of Rupees fifty thousand (Rs.50,000) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the. satisfaction of the trial Judge. S.A./F‑89/L Bail allowed.