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

BABAR ISLAM versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 Prohibited (Enforcement) Order (4 of 1979), Arts 3 and 4 bail, Applicant's grant found in possession of 850 grams of heroin, detained for more than 3 months. I am the last offender neither needed anything for the investigation, the applicants allowed bail, in the circumstances

1985 P Cr. L J 2779

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

BABAR ISLAM Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2792/B of 1984, decided on 13th November, 1984.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑-----

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3 & 4‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Petitioner allegedly found in possession of heroin weighing 850 grams, in custody for over 3 months‑‑Petitioner not a previous convict nor required any more for investigation‑‑Petitioner allowed bail, in circumstances.

Iqbal Mahmood Awan for Petitioner.

Sh. Ehsan Ahmad for the State.

Date of hearing: 13th November, 1984.

ORDER

This is an application for bail on behalf of Babar Islam petitioner in a case under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, registered at P.S. Misri Shah, vide F.I.R. No.260/203, dated 24‑7‑1984.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner was found in possession of 850 grams of Heroin on 24‑7‑1984.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there are not reasonable grounds to believe that no petitioner has committed the offence with which he has been charged, that the prosecution intends to examine police officials only, that no public man was joined in the raid and that the petitioner is no, more required for investigation. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposed the plea (sic) of the petitioner.

4. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that the petitioner was arrested on 24‑7‑1984, that he is no more required for investigation and that he is not a previous convict. Without making expression of opinion on merits, A lest it may prejudice the trial of the petitioner/ accused, I feel inclined to admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Lahore.

S. G. D. Bail 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
female advocates from Chicha watni 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.