2000 PLP 1251 (MLD)
SHADI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus HAZRAT UMAR and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2000 PLP 1251 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Abdur Rauf Khan Lughmani and Shahzad Akbar Khan, JJ |
| Parties | SHADI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus HAZRAT UMAR and another‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 1251 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 1251 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Abdur Rauf Khan Lughmani and Shahzad Akbar Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 1251 (MLD) (SHADI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus HAZRAT UMAR and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sultan Shaharyar Khan for Petitioner.
- Dost Muhammad Khan for Respondent No. 1.
- Date of hearing: 10th June; 1999.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34‑‑‑Bail, cancellation of‑‑‑Accused had been attributed usual customary role of "Lalkara" besides being empty‑handed‑‑‑Prosecution case was not that the accused had misused concession of bail in any manner‑‑‑Background of blood feud enmity existed between parties‑‑‑Consideration for cancellation of bail being somewhat different, Court declined to interfere with liberty of accused. granted to him by Trial Court, with. the observation that expressions/opinions of Trial Court to the effect that nothing was on record that principal accused had acted on direction of accused or that accused was declared innocent, were neither desirable nor permissible at bail stage for either of the parties could entertain certain doubt. Asstt.‑A.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34‑‑‑Bail, cancellation of‑‑‑Accused had been attributed usual customary role of "Lalkara" besides being empty‑handed‑‑‑Prosecution case was not that the accused had misused concession of bail in any manner‑‑‑Background of blood feud enmity existed between parties‑‑‑Consideration for cancellation of bail being somewhat different, Court declined to interfere with liberty of accused. granted to him by Trial Court, with. the observation that expressions/opinions of Trial Court to the effect that nothing was on record that principal accused had acted on direction of accused or that accused was declared innocent, were neither desirable nor permissible at bail stage for either of the parties could entertain certain doubt. Sultan Shaharyar Khan for Petitioner. Dost Muhammad Khan for Respondent No.
1. Asstt.‑A.G. for the State. Date of hearing: 10th June; 1999. ABDUR RAUF KHAN LUGHMANI, J.‑‑‑Shadi Khan has moved this applications under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. for the cancellation of bail before arrest granted to respondent No. l in case F.I.R. No. 171 dated 19‑6‑1988, registered at Police Station Tajori, under section 302/34, P.P.C., by the learned Special Judge, Lakki Marwat, vide order dated 4‑7‑1998.
2. After going through, record of the case with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties as well as the learned Assistant Advocate- General, we find that respondent No.1 has been attributed the usual customary role of 'Lalkara', besides being empty handed. He was granted before arrest bail as far back as on 4‑7‑1998 and it is not the case of the petitioner that he has misused the concession of bail in any manner. There is also background of blood feud enmity between the parties. Admittedly, the considerations for the cancellation of bail are somewhat different and in view of these circumstances of the case we do not feel persuaded to interfere with his liberty. However, we would like to observe that expression of opinion such as expressed by the learned trial Judge to the effect that nothing is on record that the principal accused acted on the directions of the respondent or that he is declared innocent, are neither desirable nor permissible at bail stage, for either of the parties may entertain certain doubt. The application stands dismissed being devoid of merits. H.B.T./69/P