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

GHULAM MUHI-UD-DIN versus THE STATE


Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 Sentencing Code (XLV of 1860), Section 304 s 304A Guarantee, the sanction of the offense is punishable by ten years but the schedule associated with the criminal code of conduct has not been amended and the offense proved The allegation did not continue as it was. The necessary bail was guaranteed for further investigation

1986 P Cr. L J 1024

[Lahore]

Before Kamal Mustafa Bokhari, J

GHULAM MUHI‑UD‑DIN Petitioner

Versus

TILE STATE Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1613/B of 1984, decided on 27th June, 1984.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 304 s 304‑A‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Offence punishable for ten years but schedule annexed to Criminal Procedure Code not amended and continued to show offence as bailable‑ Accused also not required for further investigation‑‑Bail granted.

G.A. Farid for Petitioner.

Tanvir Ahmad Khan, Asstt. A.G. assisted by Nasim Iqbal for the State.

Date, of hearing: 27th June, 1984.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner is accused of offence under section 304, P.P.C. The allegation against him is that while driving his Bus No. 7011/FDE he drove it rashly and negligently in the thickly populated area and hit Sadiq Ali deceased, a student of 6th Class, who was waiting at the Bus Adds.

2. It is argued that case against the petitioner is covered by section 304‑A, P.P.C. which is bailable. I find the offence under section 304‑A, P.P.C. is even punishable with R.I. for ten years but there is no corresponding amendment in the Schedule annexed with Criminal Procedure Code which continues to show it as bailable. On call from this Court the learned Assistant Advocate‑General has appeared and submits that the Schedule has not been‑amended and continues to show the offence as bailable.

3. The petitioner is in custody since 15‑5‑1984 and his person is no longer required for further investigation. In the Circumstances I order his release on bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Jhang.

M. 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
best law firm from Shadiwal 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.