Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

MUHAMMAD DAUD versus FAZAL ELAHI


Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) Section 498 Bail The High Court acquitted two suspects in connection with firing and seriously injuring witnesses by firing in the air and granting bail to the complainant's brother. Bail denied. By the High Court, the sets of clearly accused and arbitrary accused are appropriate.

1968 P Cr. L J 436

[Supreme Court]

Present: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, J

MIR AFSAR AND OTHERS‑Petitioners

versus

THE STATE‑Respondent

Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 301 of 1967, decided on 7th December 1967.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 25th October 1967, in Criminal Misc. No. 1 of 1967/Criminal Revision No. 1053 of 1967).

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-----

-----

S. 498‑Bail‑High Court granting bail to two accused respectively charged to have fired shots in the air and abused complainant's brother but refusing bail to others charged to have fired at witnesses and seriously injured them‑Cases of two sets of accused, held, clearly distinguishable and exercise of discretion by High Court quite proper.

Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Wajid Hussain, Senior Attorney for Petitioners.

Nemo for the State.

Date of hearing : 7th December 1967.

ORDER

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.

‑The petitioners stand convicted under section 307/149 and section 148, P. P. C. for forming an unlawful assembly and in the prosecution of its common object injuring three prosecution witnesses with fire arms.

The High Court has on a further revision granted bait to two of the co‑accused of the petitioners one of whom had fired shots in the air and the other had only abused a brother of the complainant. Bail to the petitioners has, however, been refused because they were found to have fired at three of the P. Ws., and caused serious injuries to them.

It is said that the discrimination made by the High Court among the petitioners and their co‑accused has resulted in failure of justice. The contention is plainly misconceived. The case of the petitioners and the other two was clearly distinguishable and the High Court has exercised its discretion under sections 426 and 498, Cr. P. C., quite properly in refusing bail to the petitioners pending the disposal of their revision petition.

The petition is dismissed.

S. A. H. Petition dismissed.

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
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
online advocate from Battagram lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.