1999SCMR2147 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1999SCMR2147 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Raja Afrasiab Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999SCMR2147 (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 1999SCMR2147 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan and Ch. Muhammad Arif, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999SCMR2147 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ASLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Qurban Sadiq Ikram, Advocate Supreme Court with Allah Wasaya Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 6th August, 1998.
- Muhammad Bashir, Assistant Advocate-General with Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
- RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN J.---On 10th of January, 1996 at 10-20 a.m., a case under section 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. was registered with Police Station Sadar, District Bhakhar on the statement of Muhammad Ramzan against Muhammad Aslam (petitioner), Muhammad Ahsan, Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Ashfaq, Muhammad Nawaz, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Zafar for the murder of Sadiq Hussain. The petitioner was arrested on the same day i.e. 10-1-1996. On 27th of May, 1998, a direction was issued by the High Court to the trial Court for completion of the trial against the accused within two months. This period has ended on 30th of July, 1998. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite direction of the High Court, trial against the petitioner has not yet been concluded. Learned counsel has stated that the petitioner has earned his right to be released on bail on statutory ground. Learned Assistant Advocate-General has appeared before us. He dues not oppose the grant of bail to the petitioner on the above ground.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court dated 27-5-1998 passed in Crl. Misc. No. 2104-B/98).
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/324/148/149
Despite direction of High Court trial against the accused had not been completed by the Trial Court within the specified period
Prosecution was unable to give any explanation for non-compliance of the said order of High Court
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal which was allowed and the accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Muhammad Bashir, Assistant Advocate-General with Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN J.
On 10th of January, 1996 at 10-20 a.m., a case under section 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. was registered with Police Station Sadar, District Bhakhar on the statement of Muhammad Ramzan against Muhammad Aslam (petitioner), Muhammad Ahsan, Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Ashfaq, Muhammad Nawaz, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Zafar for the murder of Sadiq Hussain. The petitioner was arrested on the same day i.e. 10-1-1996. On 27th of May, 1998, a direction was issued by the High Court to the trial Court for completion of the trial against the accused within two months. This period has ended on 30th of July, 1998. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite direction of the High Court, trial against the petitioner has not yet been concluded. Learned counsel has stated that the petitioner has earned his right to be released on bail on statutory ground. Learned Assistant Advocate-General has appeared before us. He dues not oppose the grant of bail to the petitioner on the above ground.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the trial against the petitioner has not been completed by trial Court despite direction issued by the High Court. The learned Law Officer is unable to give any explanation for non-compliance of the order of the High Court. This being so, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (rupees two lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Bhakhar. In the above terms this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. N.H.Q/M-254/5 Bail allowed.