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

ANWAR KHAN versus STATE


Section 7 497 and ail 498 guarantee that the defendant's party is aggressive, his defense request will be considered and the accused can be released on bail, the case cannot be filed, the accused without any record One can take the first case in favor of the applicant. Delay in 498 bail in prosecution proceedings terminated by session judge hearing by trial judge, delayed due to large number of cases, bail on such ground Release, holding, sanctions have a bad effect on the public [delay]
1978 S C M R 314

Present : Muhammad Akram, Waheeduddin Ahmad and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ

ANWAR KHAN‑Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE--‑Respondent

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 47 of 1977, decided on 21st June 1977

(On appeal from order of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 16th December 1976 in Cr. Misc. No. 4552/B of 1976).

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑

‑‑‑‑‑ Ss. 497 & 498‑Bail‑Contention that deceased's party being aggressors, plea of self‑defence be considered and accused be released on bail‑Not possible, held, to raise any prima facie case in favour of accused petitioner without any evidence on record.

1973 Law Notes Lah. 536 ref.

(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑

---Ss. 497 & 498‑Bail‑‑Delay in prosecution proceedings‑Committal proceedings having been abolished resulting in trial of murder cases by Sessions Judge, delay likely to occur due to pendency of large number of cases‑Accused's release on bail on such ground, held, bound Fn have bad repercussions on public.‑[Delay].

Shahid hussain Kadri, Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan assisted by Mahmood A. Qureshl, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Date of bearing : 21st June 1977.

JUDGMENT

WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD

,

J

.‑This petition for Special Leave to Appeal is directed against Order of the High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4552/B of 1976 dated 26‑1‑1977. By this Order the bail application of the petitioner was dismissed.

The occurrence took place on 29‑9‑74. Abdul Aziz the first informer alleged that the petitioner alongwith four other persons, armed with deadly weapons, attacked the complainant, as well as some others which resulted is the death of Altaf Hussain and simple injuries were caused to Hasan Muhammad, Muhammad Bakhsh P. Ws. and Abdul Aziz complainant. The allegation against the petitioner is that he gave a hatchet blow, on the head vital part of the body, of the deceased which resulted in his death. The petitioner's case is that he sustained 12 injuries, and the other co‑accused Iftikhar and Ghulam Nabi also sustained some injuries. According to him, he had a right of self‑defence, and he should have been released on bail like other accused persons.

The learned Chief Justice of the High Court in his Order under consideration has observed that it appears to be a case of sudden fight between the parties, and each person was responsible for his individual act. It is clearly alleged in the F. I. R. that Anwar Khan petitioner gave fatal blow to Altaf Hussain deceased by a hatchet. The injury was found by the doctor to be dangerous to life. It was on account of this that the deceased died. On these facts it appears to us that the learned Chief Justice was perfectly justified in rejecting the bail application.

Mr. Shahid Hussain Qadri, learned counsel for the petitioner, has urged that the plea of self‑defence should be considered at this stage. According to him, the aggressor party was of the deceased, and, therefore, the petitioner should be released on bail. The learned counsel referred to a decision of y ' the Lahore High Court given by the learned Chief Justice in 1973 Law Notes Lah. 536 and contended that in this case the plea of self‑defence was taken into consideration. In our opinion this contention is not well founded. Without any evidence on the record it is not possible to raise any prima facie case in favour of the petitioner. This contention, therefore, fails.

It was next contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a delay of about 3 years and, therefore, the petitioner should be released on this ground. In our opinion, mere delay is no ground to grant bail. Under the present law, the committal proceedings have been abolished and murder cases are to be tried by the Sessions Judge. There would be,, thus large number of cases pending in the Court and delay in these cases is likely to occur. In these, circumstances, if accused persons are released on bail on this ground, it will have bad repurcussions on the public. In spite of this, we would, direct the trial Court to expedite the disposal of the case.

Subject to the above remarks, the petition is dismissed.

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
registration advocate from Musakhel 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.