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

MUKHTAR HUSSAIN versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Sections 498 and 561A of the Penal Code (XLV of 1860), provisions 408, 468, 471 and 477 of an offense (enforcement hood) ordinance (VI of 1979), S14. After two years of being a party to the party, no action was taken against the accused for filing any kind of false case as police believe the complaint was false 3 years after the investigation again. Opening the session, the accused passed the bail in the 25, O00 bail granted by the Sessions Court to the amount of 2 lakh, in this case the amount was 1 lakh 90 thousand.

1984 M L D 1256

[ Karachi]

Before Ajmal Mian, J

MUKHTAR HUSSAIN--Applicant

versus

THE STATE--Respondent

Criminal Bail Application No. 526 of 1984, decided on 12th June, 1984.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--

---Ss. 498 & 561-A--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 408, 468, 471& 477-A--Offences against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S 14--Accused allegedly being a party to misappropriation of certain amount--Case being registered after two years of occurrence- No action taken by police against accused as police was of the view that complaint was false--Investigation reopening after 3 years--Accused admitted to bail by Sessions Court in sum of Rs.25,o00--Bail amount increased to 2 lacs at stage of confirmation of bail, on ground that amount involved was Rs.1,90,000--Bail amount found to be excessive in view of background of case was reduced to Rs.50,000 in circumstances.

Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui for the Applicant.

ORDER

The applicant is involved in offences under section 408/468/471/ 477-A, P.P.C. and section 14 of the lslami Hudood Ordinance, 1979, for allegedly being a party to misappropriation of the sum of about Rs.2 lacs. The offence was allegedly committed in 1979 and the F.I.R. was lodged in 1981 The case was investigated but no action was taken as police was of the view that the complaint was false However, the above investigation has been reopened recently by the Crimes Branch. The present applicant was admitted to bail by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge by his order, dated 10-5-1984 in the sum of Rs.25,000.

However, when the matter came up for confirmation of the bail, the bail amount was increased to Rs.2 lacs on the ground that the amount involved is Rs.1,90,000. The learned Additional Advocate-General in view of the above background of the facts submits that the bail amount as fixed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, appears to be excessive. I am inclined to agree with him. I would, therefore reduce the bail amount to Rs.50,000 with one surety and P.R. in the like amount. The above application is, therefore, allowed to the above extent.

H.A.K. Application allowed.

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 Hala 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.