Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YASIN versus STATE

Bail bonds issued by the applicant in connection with the confiscation of sections 514 and 499 of the Penal Code (XLV of 1860), sections 302, 324 and 34 of the bail for which the applicant failed to appear in court on bail. Were seized, petitioner challenged the order to seize bail bonds in review, claiming that their deposited bonds were for trial of the accused on specific dates on which the accused appeared in court. As such, petitions cannot be punished for failure to appear in court after certain dates. That he did not stand as a guarantor for the accused for any financial gain, but he did consider humanitarian sympathy. And that during the trial, the court adopted a very rigorous view, and upon its approval the judicial decision was dismissed. Following the hearing, the hearing of the provisions of Section 499 of the latest bail bail was postponed by a guaranteed bail of each date, CCP has revealed that the accused is obliged to appear in court only after the bail hearing. Unless directed by the court at the time of filing, Bond will be responsible for the preparation of the charges before the court till the date of each and every hearing until the final decision of this matter / matter, as directed by the relevant court. Don't be done The ad interim was silent on the responsibility of bailing and on various dates during the proceedings, with respect to the guarantee that he was responsible for the preparation of the charge. Section 141414, used only for a specific date, is not a disadvantage of the principles set forth in the rule of jurisdiction under CRPC law firms from Daska lawyer