Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL versus NUSRAT ALI SADDIQUI

For the attachment and sale of the property of the applicant / guarantor of the forfeiture of a bond of section 514, the Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), section 343, 337 L (ii), 337 D&34 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Issuance of General Warrants. The applicant stood for bail, he disappeared from the trial court and was convicted, the trial court initiated proceedings against the applicant / bail under CRPC, 4-514 and 60, After seizing the entire amount of Rs. 000, the applicant was instructed to pay the fine on the due date. The applicant had failed to submit the confiscated amount till the due date; the warrants were issued for the attachment of the applicant's immovable property; every date of hearing of the petition was bound to get the accused's presence in court, but the accused went to trial. Has been damaged by Even otherwise the applicant / bailor is a guarantor of humanitarian grounds and should not have kept a balance for any financial gain, irrespective of the applicant / guarantor's financial status. In addition to the severity of the matter, the facts of the case did not demand any intervention by the impound order passed by the courts and were retained, however, given the specific circumstances of the volume of the case. In the interest of justice, fines have been reduced from Rs 30,000 to Rs 10,000 top civil advocates from Bhakkar lawyer