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

SALAMAT versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) Section 497 Demanding Immediate Demand for Guarantee, Holding the Accusation of the accused The bail trial came months after his arrest.

1983 P Cr. L J 2167

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

SALAMAT AND OTHERS‑---Petitioners

Versus

THE STATE‑Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2128‑B of 1981, decided on 19th August, 1981.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑

-----‑S. 497‑‑Bail‑Demand of speedy trial, held, right of accused person‑In case of denial of such right, accused, held further, entitled to be released on bail‑Petitioner's challan in Court not submitted till four months after his arrest‑Bail allowed in circum. stances of case.

Syed Kalim Ahmad Khurshid for Petitioners.

G. A. Farid Khan for the State.

ORDER

This is an application for bail on behalf of Salamat. Amanat and Barkat Ali in a case under section 10111/16 of the Offence of Zina Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at Police Station Saddar, Sheikpura vide F. I. R. No. 166/1981.

2. The allegations against the petitioners are that they committed rape upon Mst. Razia Bibi, complainant.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a delay of 20 days in lodging the F. I. R. and there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners have committed the alleged crime.

Learned counsel further submits that although the petitioners were arrested on 18th April, 1981 yet the challan has not been submitted.

4. As against this, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed this petition. He submits that the alleged offence falls within the prohibitory clause, the offence being heinous one the petitioners are not entitled to bail.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I find that the petitioners were arrested on 18th April, 1981 and the challan has not been submitted so far. I am of the opinion that the demand of speedy trial and early submission of the challan is the right of an accused person and in case be is denied this right without any fault on his part then he would be justified in asking for bail.

Without making any expression lest it may prejudice the merits of the case, I allow The petitioners bail in the sum of Rs. 10,000 (rupees. Ten thousand) with one surety, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of A..C. Sheikhupura.

6. It would be open to the complainant or the prosecution to apply for the cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioners after the submis sion of the challan, if so advised.

M.Y.M Bail granted.

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
advocates from FR Peshawar 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.