Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD TAJ versus STATE

The dishonesty of the accused was behind the bars of the prison, from 1911 to 2009 and was not a former offender; Did not attract In such cases there was a bail rule and the exception was denied. Four other cases of the same nature were pending against the accused, but he remained on bail in such cases and was not guilty of any kind. The sentence was not pronounced. It was not enough to deny arbitrary relief on his bail. Every criminal case should be considered in the background of its facts and circumstances, and the facts of the two guilty cases are rarely found. Bail bail is always granted in the court. But it was subject to the condition that such an exercise was always fair and bail could not be barred under the scope of well-established principles as the defendant succeeded in bringing a case for bail, under the circumstances. , Was admitted on bail

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• RAZZAQ AHMED NADEEM v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2010 MLD 1704
• JAVED AKHTAR v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1707
• MUHAMMAD ISMAIL v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through D.O.R. Layyah 2010 MLD 1708
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1709
• QADEEMI IMAM BARGAH v. Syed MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN SHAH 2010 MLD 1714
• ABDUL RAZZAQ alias KARIM KHAN v. MUHAMMAD AKRAM CHAUDHRY, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, LAHORE 2010 PCrLJ 1717
• KHUDA BUKHSH v. KHUSHI MUHAMMAD 2010 YLR 1721
• MUHAMMAD MANSHA v. D.P.O., KASUR 2010 MLD 1722

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

registration advocate from Naseerabad lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes