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

GHULAM ALIAS GOMI versus THE STATE


The Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) 497 and 498 passed the bail, considering that the accused accused of no clear action in committing the crime showed the High Court at its discretion to violate any principle of law. Is shown. Appeal dismissed

1968 P Cr. L J 447 (1)

[Supreme Court]

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

FAROOQ AHMAD‑Petitioner

versus

GHULAM SHABBIR AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 303 of 1967, decided on 5th December 1967.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 10th November 1967, in Cr. Misc. No. 4937 of 1967).

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

----

Ss. 497 & 498‑Bail High Court granting bail‑Consideration that no overt act in committing offence was attributable to accused ‑ High Court not shown to have exercised discretion in violation of any principle of law‑Petition to Supreme Court for special leave to appeal dismissed.

Muhammad Jafar Malik, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Karim Sheikh, Attorney for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 5th December 1967.

ORDER

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.

‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of the High Court granting bail to Ghulam Shabbir and Allah Ditta, respondents, who along with 8 others have been challaned under section 302 read with section 149, P. P. C. for the murder of one Sawan.

The consideration which prevailed with the learned Judge in the High Court in granting bail was that no overt act in causing the death of Sawan deceased was attributed to either of the respondents and that one of them was studying in M. A. class and the other was an employee of the District Board.

It cannot be said that the learned Judge has acted in breach of the provisions of section 498, Cr. P. C. or exercised his discretion in granting bail to the respondents in violation of any principle of law to call for interference by this Court.

The petition is 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
famous supreme court advocate from Astore 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.