Sections 403 and 497 of the Prevention Code (XLV of 1860), the Prevention of Corruption Act of 379 (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) of the Electricity Act (IX of 1910), Sections 39 and 39 of the Constitution of Pakistan, Article 13 Theft, unlawful restoration, energy theft and installation of artificial sources guaranteed, jail grants or fines double risk, the accused was arrested for stealing electricity from poles by direct connection, the accused detained from 25 to 2013 Yes, the investigation was completed and he was no longer there. For the purposes of further investigation or questioning, one of the factors in detaining the accused was the need for a custody inquiry, and he also did not refrain from it when a conviction was imposed only for fines. Then the defendant was entitled to bail because if he was sentenced to a mere fine at trial, then as a prisoner at trial, denial of bail would be a double jeopardy violation which violated Article 13 (a) of the law. ? In addition to this, no person other than Section 403, CR PC should be bothered twice for the same purpose. Thereafter, it would not be possible to compensate him for his continued detention of the prisoners in the judicial lockup during the trial, which was not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this time. Source guarantees should not be discounted
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2014
