Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Criminal Revision No. 9 of 1977, decided on 15th February 1977.
S. 8(3)-Detention order passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate in routine without affording any opportunity to petitioner either to engage a counsel or to affectively defend himself-Order extending; further period of detention passed by Commissioner also based on earlier order of Sub-Divisional Magistrate and petitioner again forded no opportunity of hearing-Petitioner allowed bail, in circumstances. [Bail.
1976 P Cr. L J 682 ref.
Muhammad Ali Shaikh for Applicant.
A. H. Lakho, A. A.-G. for the State.
The main ground for release of the petitioner on bail is that the order of detention under section 8(3)(b) was a routine order, which was passed on 1-12-76, as soon as the petitioner was produced before the S. D. M. for starting these proceedings under the Crime Control Act. That no opportunity was allowed to the petitioner to engage a counsel or to effectively defend himself that the statements recorded are formal and in fact they were repetition of the grounds mentioned in the Act itself. Mr. Mohammad Ali Shaikh, Advocate, has quoted a previous bail order of this Court reported in 1976 P Cr. L J 682 in support of his contention. It has then been pointed out that the order of the Commissioner extending the period further by 2 months would also suffer from the same defects having been based on the earlier order of the S. D. M. That no opportunity was given to the petitioner to be heard before passing of the extension order. That in any case the period of detention could not be extended to facilitate completion of the inquiry by the S. D. M., which had not even started.
Mr. A. H. Lakho has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner being a habitual offender may repeat these offences if let out during the pendency of the inquiry. However in view of the grounds urged regarding the original order and the subsequent order having been based on the original order, bail is granted to the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 5, with P. R. and one surety to the satisfaction of the S. D. M. and trial Court, C Hyderabad.
Petition allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer