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

MAYO versus STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) Section 497 (1), Proviso 111 Panel Code (XLV of 1860), 5 302/34 bail, bail bail hearing sought on legal basis for delay in legal proceedings, trial At the hearing, the court denied the allegations that the accused faced contradictions. The trial was not delayed by the accused as they brutally committed the murder. During the trial or any misconduct or dangerous behavior in the jail police was not charged with any crime of the previous conviction and the required nature of the accused. The prosecution cannot be used as a basis for detention and thus on disappointing and dangerous bail.

1986 M L D 1213

[Karachi]

Before Muhammad Zahoorul Haq, J

MAYO and 2 others‑‑Applicants/Accused

Versus

THE STATE‑‑Opponent/Complainant

Criminal Bail Application No.228 of 1986, decided on 28th April 1986.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

‑‑‑S.497(1), proviso 111‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.302/34‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Bail sought on statutory ground of delay in trial‑‑Bail refused by Trial Court on ground that accused were desparate as they committed murder in a cruel manner‑‑Delay of trial not caused by accused persons‑‑No misconduct or dangerous attitude attributed to accuses during trial or in Jail‑‑Police report about previous conviction and desparate nature of accused in negative‑‑Question of murder by accused in cruel manner was under‑trial and thus could not be used as basis for holding accused desperate and dangerous‑‑Bail granted in circumstances.

Shaikh Rehman Bux,.for Applicant/ Accused.

Sarfraz Ahmed, A.A.‑G. for the State.

ORDER

The present applicants were refused bail by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu, on the ground that they were desparate acid dangerous persons as evidenced from their conduct in killing the deceased, who had been first fired at and then dragged into cultivation, where Aziz and Guloo had caused hatchet blows to him. It is an admitted position that there was more than two years delay between time o arrest of the applicants and the bail application of the applicant. The delay in trial had not been caused by the applicants. There was no misconduct or dangerous attitude attributed to them during the trial or in jail. Moreover, the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge himself had asked for a police report in respect of the previous conviction and dangerous, desparate and hardened nature of the applicants from P.S. A Rukhan. But the report was in the negative. In these circumstnces it was hardly' open to the IInd Additional Sessions Judge to refuse the bail to the applicants because the question of their killing the decease in a cruel manner was still under‑trial and the same could not ordinarily be used as the basis of the applicants being desparate and dangerous criminal. Consequently, the bail is granted to the applicants on providing two sureties for each of them in the sum of Rs. 20, 000 each with P.B in the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

H.A.K. 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
lawer from fb area from Talagang 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.