Find a Lawyer

NOORUDDIN versus STATE

Section 514 Control of the Narcotic Substances Ordinance (XLVII of 1995), charged with the imprisonment of Section 9 bail accused for which the applicant disappeared from bail, his bail was granted by the trial court. And the notice was issued under section 141414, CRPC issued the petitioner / bail to the court and for the preparation of the accused and the notice issued to him under Section 14, CCPC. Time was called for submission of the answer, but he was granted more than two years to the applicant / bail, but failed to present the accused, the court Ordered to pay the applicant / bail amount The bail bond had nothing to do with the bail that was executed within the specified period, but the detention was changed as the accused was held in bail. And he was responsible for presenting the accused in court, if and when the order is ordered or in the absence of need or for non-indictment of the accused before the court, the bail will be liable for fines under the guaranteed law, The accused, facing a charge of drug trafficking, was linked to the uprising, while Little Irons / Bail was a resident of the city and he It was from different castes and communities and nothing was in the record which shows that the applicant / bailor is based on bail and not on humanitarian basis, as the applicant / bail applicant / bailor himself. It was stated in the petition that the absence of the accused is in addition to the order of his control trial court, according to which the applicant / bail was directed to act accordingly. famous supreme court advocate from Jhal Magsi lawyer