Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 57 of 1966, decided on 6th April 1968.

S. 497(5)-Bail Cancellation of-Challan under Ss. 307/149, 452 do 148, P. P., C. against 5 accused including 2 absconding-Three arrested accused released on bail on 20-6-66.Two absconding accused arrested on 27-6-66 and 25-7-66 and erroneously released on bail on basis of earlier order under which 3 of accused were granted bail-Bail of accused arrested later cancelled for want of an order to that effect.

I.H.B. Hanfi for Petitioner.

Basharat Ullah for Respondents.

Muhammad Yaqub Khan for the State.

Date of hearing : 6th April 1968.

A challan was, submitted under sections 307/149, 452 and 148 against Muhammad Yousaf, Muhammad Younis, Ghulam Sarwar, Ballo alias Hidayat Ullah, and Hayat Ullah, respondents and the case was put up for trial before the learned Special Railway Magistrate, who vile the same order. Habib Ullah, petitioner then went up before the learned Sessions Judge for the cancella tion of bail of all the five respondents. The learned Sessions Judge vide his order dated the 12th of August 1966, rejected the applica tion. Habib Ullah petitioner has now preferred this application for cancellation of bail of all the five respondents.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, is not pressing for the cancellation of bail of the three respondents, namely, Muhammad Yousaf, Muhammad Younis and Ghulam Sarwar, but prays for cancellation of bail of Hidayat Ullah and Hayat Ullah, respondents, on the ground that there was never any order passed releasing them on bail. According to the challan I find that Hidayat Ullah was arrested on the 27th of June 1966, while Hayat Ullah was arrested on the 25th of July 1966, and, therefore, how could the order dated the 20th of June 1966, apply to them. The learned Magistrate was asked explain and he in his report dated the 4th of April 1967, ha stated as under :-

"I was under the impression that this order would also cover up the question of bail in respect of the absconding accused Nos. 4 and 5 (Hidayat Ullah and Hayat Ullah) at the time of their arrest. But unfortunately since an irregularity has occurred, which is very much regretted."

It appears that this Magistrate has no idea of Criminal law at all. How could his order dated the 20th of June 1966, be applicable to these two respondents, when they were not even under 'arrest at that time. Since there was no order releasing them on bail, I cancel their bail and direct that they should be taken into custody forthwith. The application for cancellation of bail regarding the other three respondents, namely, Muhammad Yousaf, Muhammad Younis and Ghulam Sarwar is, however, rejected.

Petition partly accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.