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

NAZAR MUHAMMAD versus THE STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Sections 498 Contempt Rules (XLV of 1860), Sections 325 and 148/149 Guarantees Before Grant, Grant of Applicants Appointed to Investigate During Temporary Bail Period In the absence of a special order, interim bail to join the inquiry, to no avail, the applicant, fails to grant interim bail, wrong conditions, refusal to confirm interim bail

1985 P Cr. L J 1746

[Lahore]

Before

Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J

NAZAR MUHAMMAD and others‑‑Petitioners

versus

THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1989/B of 1984, decided on 2nd August, 1984.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

---S.498‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 325 & 148/149‑‑Bail before arrest, grant of‑‑Petitioners never joining investigation during period of interim bail‑‑Absence of any specific order of Court to petitioners to join investigation during interim bail, held, of no avail‑‑Petitioners, held, misused concession of interim bail, in‑circumstances ‑‑Confirmation of‑interim bail declined.

Khan Khudadad Khan Barki for Petitioners.

Mrs. Salma Tasaddaq for the State.

ORDER

The present case was registered vide F.I.R. No. 301, dated 22‑6‑1984, under section 325/452/148/149, P.P.C. Their petition for pre‑arrest bail was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereafter they approached this Court. They were allowed interim bail before arrest by my order, dated 19‑7‑1984.

2. I have checked up the police file of this case and have also been informed by the learned State counsel that the petitioners did not join the investigation of this case at any stage of the investigation.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there was no order by this Court while granting interim bail that the petitioners should join the investigation. It is next contended that according to his instructions, the petitioners joined the investigation.

4. I have checked up the police record as stated above. The petitioners never joined the investigation of this case. The contention of the learned counsel that there was no specific order of this Court to the petitioners that they should join investigation is wholly misconceived. Such an order is never necessary. It is the duty of the accused that they should associate themselves with the investigation. This means that so far they have been misusing the concession of interim bail earlier allowed to them by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Okara and then given to them by this Court I will not,) therefore, hear the petition on merits. Dismissed.

S. G. D. Bail refused.

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
power of attorney advocate Dera Bugti 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.