Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 187 of 1985, decided on 14th September, 1985.
‑‑‑S. 499‑‑Bail bonds, reduction in‑‑Petitioner not named in F.I.R. and question as to what was charge against him yet to be found out when Investigating Officer appearing in Court with record and apprising Court of actual part played and amount involved in case against petitioner‑‑Bail bonds for amount of Rs.26 lacs reduced to Rs.5 lacs, in circumstances.
Raja Muhammad Anwar for Petitioner.
Nazir Ahmad Ghazi, Public Prosecutor for the State.
Date of hearing: 14th September, 1985.
As per my order, dated 30‑7‑1985, passed on the file of B.A. 195 of 1985, the petitioner was granted interim bail in the sum of Rs.26,00,000 with one surety in the like amount till 1‑10‑1985 for which date the Investigating Officer was summoned alongwith the record. Learned counsel for the accused‑petitioner had filed this application Crl. M. No. 187 of 1985 for the reduction of the amount of the bonds. I heard arguments on this Misc. application on 4‑9‑1985. On his request, I have heard him again today. Today his plea is that at least till the next date of hearing which is 1‑10‑1985, the date fixed for the Pucca hearing of the main bail application, the amount of the bonds shall be reduced to a sum of Rs.5 lacs as the accused is not named in the F. I. R.
2. I have considered the argument of the learned counsel for the accused‑petitioner. I have also heard learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. Nazir Ahmad Ghazi again. The accused is not named in the F.I.R. He might have been arrested on mere suspicion or on a flimsy ground. Learned counsel for the accused says that his instructions are that the said accused was arrested in one case for that reason he was falsely involved in this case. That may be true. That matter is yet to be sorted out when the Investigating Officer appears in this Court. At present, therefore, it is not known what is the charge of allegation against him and whether or not the said charge specifies any amount in respect of which the offence is alleged to have been committed by the accused. At this stage, therefore, it cannot be definitely said that any amount has been specified in the charge against the accused. It is not possible to accept the plea of the learned Public Prosecutor that the amount in respect 'of which the scheduled offences have been committed is specified in the F.I.R. in which the accused has been involved. The accused cannot be allowed to remain deprived of the liberty till his case clearly comes within the letter and spirit of law.
The question as to what is the charge against him and whether any amount is specified in the charge against him can be found out only when the Investigating Officer appears in this Court on the next date of hearing alongwith the record and apprises this Court of the actual part played by the accused petitioner in this case. The purpose of the bail is to ensure the presence of the accused in this Court and that end can be fully met/if the amount of the interim bail allowed to the accused petitioner is reduced to Rs.5 lacs. I accordingly reduce the amount of bonds to be submitted by the accused and his surety‑ to a sum of Rs.5 lacs as prayed. My order, dated 31‑7‑1985 on the file of B.A. No. 195 of 1985 shall be deemed to have been amended to that extent. I may, however, add that if on 1‑10‑1985 it is found that the charge against the accused specifies any amount in respect of which the offence is alleged to have been committed then the amount of the bonds shall be enhanced to a sum of Rs.26,000,00.
S. G. D. Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer