SCMR 2002

2002 PLP 1817 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Petition No. 202‑L of 2002, decided on 11th April, 2002.
Honorable Judges
Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2002 PLP 1817 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE‑‑‑Petitioner 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 2002 PLP 1817 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1817 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Ramday and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1817 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE‑‑‑Petitioner 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

  • Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing: 11th April, 2002.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment dated 14‑2‑2002 of the Lahore High Court passed in Criminal Miscellenous.594/B of 2001). ‑‑‑‑Ss.497 (1) & 497(5)‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973 Art.185(3)‑‑‑Bail, cancellation of‑‑‑Illness‑‑‑Non‑compliance of advice of doctor‑‑‑Accused was granted interim postarrest bail on the ground of bad health, by the Sessions Judge during his official visit to the jail‑‑‑Doctor advised the accused to get M.R.I. done so that thereafter opinion could be given whether the accused needed surgery‑‑‑Accused failed to comply with the advice of the doctor‑‑ Bail was cancelled by the Sessions Judge and High Court refused to grant the same‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑High Court had rightly declined to grant bail to the accused which was cancelled by the Sessions Judge‑‑‑Order passed by the High Court did not suffer from any illegality‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused.

Judgment & Decree

MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.‑‑‑The petitioner an undertrial prisoner who was lodged in jail, was granted interim postarrest bail during the inspection of the jail by the learned Sessions Judge which was cancelled due to his non‑appearance during the trial. Against the order of cancellation of bail, before arrest which remained effective for about 11 months. The interim postarrest bail was granted by the learned Sessions Judge on account of bad health condition of the petitioner. The matter was referred to the board but the board did not give any definite opinion whereas the private Doctor to whom the petitioner approached, who advised him to get MRI done and thereafter opinion could be given whether the petitioner needed surgery which was not got done by the petitioner:

2. The order passed by the learned Judge of the High Court impugned in this petition does not suffer from any illegality, therefore, this petition being meritless is hereby dismissed and leave refused. Q.M.H./M.A.K./M‑406/S Petition dismissed.