2007 PLP 1289 (YLR)
MERWAAN MURSHIDI and 15 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1289 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Jehangir Arshad, J |
| Parties | MERWAAN MURSHIDI and 15 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1289 (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 2007 PLP 1289 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Jehangir Arshad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1289 (YLR) (MERWAAN MURSHIDI and 15 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Pervaiz Aftab for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Agricultural Pesticides Ordinance (II of 1971), S.23(a)
None of the offences against accused being punishable with more than three years, same- would not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr. P. C.
Grant of bail to an accused in a case not falling within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr. P. C. was a rule and refusal was an exception
Accused were behind the bars since 1-10-2006, challan had been submitted and they were no more required
Accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances. PLD 1968 SC 349 ref. Imtiaz Ahmad Sheikh for the State. Akhtar Hussain, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR ARSHAD, J.
Petitioners are accused in. case F.I.R. No. 599 of 2006 dated 1-10-2006 under sections 23(a), 15-14-15(5), 62-V, 13-62 VI-A(1) Pesticides Ordinance 1971 Police Station, Mumtazabad, Multan. They seek their post-arrest bail in the said case on the ground that they are behind the bars since 1-10-2006, none of the offences are punishable with more than three years and that the challan has already been sent to the Court and thus the petitioners are no more required and that their further incarceration would be nothing but punishing them before the trial which- is not only against the principle of natural justice but also against the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in PLD 1968 SC 349.
2. On the other hand learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed this application.
3. I have considered the arguments and have also perused the record.
4. Admittedly none of the offences is punishable with more than three years and thus does not fall within the .prohibitory clause and as held by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in PLD 1968 SC 349 grant of bail to an accused in a case not falling 'within the prohibitory clause is a rule and refusal is an exception and it is not the case here. Even otherwise petitioners are behind the bars since 1-10-2006, challan has been submitted and that they are no more required. In this view of the matter I am inclined to allow this. petition and the petitioners are allowed to, be released on bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-624/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.