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

MUHAMMAD ANWAR versus THE STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CR PC) Sections 497 (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 and 307 bail, two-year grant after the arrest of the applicant, the trial has not yet been terminated because the applicant filed the case. At the hearing, the court denied bail that the co-accused had been absconding, since there was no fault in the absence of the petitioner's co-accused from the process of law for a long time, there is no good for denying his bail. Maybe, the petitioner allowed bail, in the circumstances

1985 P Cr. L J 1531

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

MUHAMMAD ANWAR and another‑‑Petitioners

versus

THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 281‑B/BWP of 1984, decided on 25th June, 1984.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

---S.497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 307‑‑Bail, grant of Two years passed since arrest of petitioner yet trial not concluded so far‑ Petitioner declined bail by trial Court on ground that co‑accused remained fugitive from process of law for sufficient long time‑‑Petitioner not being at fault at all absence of co‑accused, held, could be no good ground to refuse him bail‑‑Petitioner allowed bail, in circumstances.

Sardar Ahmad Khan for Petitioners.

Muhammad Akbar for the State.

ORDER

This is an application for bail on behalf of Muhammad Anwar and Muhammad Ashiq petitioners in case under section 302/307/325/34, P.P.C. registered at P.S. City Khanpur, District Rahimyar Khan vide F.I.R. No. 107/82.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the petitioners were arrested on 2‑5‑1982 and two years have passed yet the trial has not concluded. The learned counsel for the State is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioners were arrested on 2‑5‑1982, that two years have passed and the trial has not concluded so far and that the trial Court refused bail on the ground that Abdul Majid co‑accused remained fugitive from process of law for sufficient long time which to my mind is not a good ground to refuse bail to the petitioners who were not at fault at all.

4. For what has been stated above, the petitioners are allowed bail on the ground of statutory delay subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Rahimyar Khan.

S.G.D. 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
immigration advocates email from Khanewal 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.