Find a Lawyer

Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos.228 & 231 of 1975, decided on 17th November 1975,

(On appeal from the orders of the Lahore High Court, dated the 12th of May 1975, in Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 574-B 1044‑B and 1711‑B of 1995).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)---

--Art. 185(1) read with Criminal Procedure Code ,(V of 1898 S. 498‑Bail‑Supreme Court ordering as interim ‑ Measure that in case of preliminary inquiry being not concluded within

two petitioners might renew application for interim bail‑‑Inquiry concluded within two months but some accused later appearing before Inquiry Court and asking for examination I of prosecution witnesses earlier given up by prosecution, and case consequently adjourned to another date for examination of prosecution‑Inquiry being about to conclude, not desirable, held, to release accused on bail in circumstances.[Bail].

Shaukat Ali, Senior Advocate Supreme court instructed by Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioners (in both the petitions).

Nemo for the State ( in both

the petitions).

Date of hearing : 17th November

1975:

‑

These

two petitions have been heard together and this order will dispose of both of them.

Petition No. 228 of 1975 is by ten accused against an order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court refusing to grant bail to the accused.

Petition No. 231 of 1975 is by six accused against the orders of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court cancelling their bail.

A case under sections 302/307/109 and some other sections of the Pakistan Penal Code was registered against the accused persons in February 1973. AL, incomplete challan was put in against them on the 15th of March 1973, and a complete challan was put in on the 12th of July 1973. Wail Muhammad and Muhammad Hussain (petitioners Nos. 9 and 10 in Petition No. 228 of 1975) have born in jail since 1973, and they were never granted bail. The other accused persons, however, were granted bail, which was subsequently cancelled by the High Court.

An application for release on bail of petitioners in Petition No. 228 of 1975 came up before one of us on tire 30th of July 1975, and it was ordered as an interim measure that if the preliminary inquiry was not concluded within two months from date the petitioners might renew their application for interim bail.

We are now told that the inquiry had as a matter of fact conclude on the 25th of September 1975, but since then two of the accused who had been examined from personal appearance appeared before the Court and asked for examination of sore, prosecution witnesses who has been earlier given up by the prosecution. 21st of November 1975, has now been fixed for examination of those witness.

Evidently the inquiry is about to conclude, and it is not, desirable to release the accused on bail.

We, accordingly, dismiss both the petitions, but direct that the inquiry should be concludes with the utmost expedition.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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