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

KIFAYATULLAH ALIAS KIFAYAT KHAN versus STATE


Articles 185 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), sections 497 and 498, have refused to grant bail with the observation that the matter could be ignored by the trial court in the light of the evidence. The relevant district was not yet constituted in Pilia, which was not pressured before the High Court, where it could be more satisfactorily dealt with by the Supreme Court to appeal.

1985 S C M R 559

Present: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Nasim Hasan Shah and M. S. H. Quraishi, JJ

KIFAYATULLAH alias KIFAYAT KHAN‑‑Petitioner

versus

THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Criminal Petition No.55‑P of 1984, decided on 12th December 1984.

(On appeal from the judgment, dated 21‑11‑1.984 of the Peshawar High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 765 of 1984).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.497 & 498‑‑High Court declining grant of bail with observation that matter may be reconsidered by trial Court in light of evidence produced‑‑Order impugned with plea that offence bas cognizable by Special Court which had not yet been constituted in concerned district‑‑Plea not having been pressed before High Court where it could have been dealt with more satisfactorily. leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court.

Abdur Rehman Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Nur Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (absent) .

Nemo for the State.

Date of hearing: 12th December, 1984.

ORDER

NASIM HAS AN SHAH, J

.‑‑ The main ground pressed before us in support of the plea for bail is that the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner is within the cognizance of the Special Court visualized by the provisions of the Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act but that no Special Court has yet been constituted in the District Dir. Hence, the observation made by the learned Judge of the High Court while dismissing the petitioner's application for bail that the trial Court may reconsider the question of bail in the light of the evidence produced in the case is not of much practical utility.

We observe that the above ground was not pressed before the learned Judge of the High Court who could have gone into the question and ascertained whether or not any Special Court has been constituted in the District Dir and if not why not and in the light of all the information acquired in this regard dealt with the plea of the petitioner more satisfactorily.

The petitioner may, however, even now if so advised, move the High Court for consideration of this point.

This application, with the above observations, is dismissed.

M I. Petition dismissed.

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
tax advocates from Tando Mohd Khan 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.