Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 70‑R of 1983 in Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 1983, decided on 30th November, 1983.
‑‑ Ss. 497 & 498‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/34‑Bail in murder case Applicants‑respondents convicted by trial Court but acquitted by High Court‑Petition for leave to appeal against acquittal filed by complainant‑appellant granted by Supreme Court and non -bail able warrants for arrest of applicants also issued‑No case for grant of bail to two of accused made out‑Counsel of third applicant informing that one of applicant's legs was fractured and efforts to treat same in jail had failed‑Such fact not refuted by counsel of complainant‑appellant‑Bail granted to said third applicant.
M. B. Zaman, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on‑Record for Appellant.
Ijaz Hussain Batalvi, Advocate Supreme Court with M. A. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
Rao Muhammad Yousaf, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Date of hearing : 30th November, 1983.
Allah Wasaya, Ghulam Muhammad and Khadim Hussain applicants‑respondents were tried and convicted of offence under section 302/34, P. P. C. but were acquitted by the High Court by its judgment, dated 8‑12‑1979. The complainant‑appellant filed a petition for leave to appeal against their acquittal which was granted by this Court on 12‑6‑1983. Non‑bail able warrants for their arrest were also issued. They were consequently arrested.
All the three accused have now applied for suspension of their sentence through the present application which is opposed by the counsel for the complainant‑appellant.
2. We have beard the learned counsel for the parties. No case for grant of bail to Allah Wasaya and Khadim Hussain has been made out. The application with respect to them is, therefore, rejected.
3. As for Ghulam Muhammad respondent, his counsel informed us that one of his legs has been fractured and all efforts to treat the same in jail have failed. Counsel for the complainant has not refuted this fact. We therefore, accept the application qua him and grant him bail in the sum of Rs. 30,000 with two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Muzaffargarh.
S, Q. Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer