NOOR SULEMAN versus DARAY KHAN
Section 497 (5) Appeal Code (XLV of 1860), Application for Cancellation of Sections 302/324/34 Bail The trial court was sufficiently permissible to say that a thorough investigation of the matter was required, with a guarantee in the petition It was appropriate to approach. Further inquiry was not able to demand that the applicant cancel the bail, saying that the order of bail was a violation of legal principles and resulted in the abortion of justice. No unusual situation was identified which Guarantees can be hindered. The contradiction between the ocular and medical evidence could be settled only at trial, therefore, the accused could remain on bail, the present case was not a proper case in which the intervention under Section 497 (5), PCP. Which would otherwise have been arbitrary and not mandatory. The request for cancellation of bail was dismissed, in the circumstances
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
top advocates from Akhora Khattak lawyer
