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.
Bail Application 299 of 1985, decided on 11th January, 1986.
‑‑‑S. 497(1), proviso III‑‑Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance (IX of 1984), S.5(6)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of .1860), S.409/419/ 420/467/468/471‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (11 of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑Bail, refusal of‑‑Accused alleged. to have committed offences which were not punishable with death‑‑Period of more than a year having not elapsed since arrest, of accused‑‑Grant of bail to accused on ground of delay 1 in conclusion of trial, held, would be in violation of clear provision of section 497(1), proviso III and would be without jurisdiction‑-Bail declined.
Khalid Javid Saleemi for Petitioner.
Nazir A. Ghazi, P.P. for the State.
Previously a criminal Court could, in its discretion grant bail under section 497, Cr.P.C. on the basis of delay of ever, a relatively small period of time occasioned in the conclusion of trial of an accused person. Proviso III to Subsection (1) of section 497 Cr.P.C. added by Code of Criminal Procedure (2nd Amendment) Ordinance, 1979 (71 of 1979), however, fixed the time lag which would qualify an accused person for the grant of bail, at a continuous period of more than one year in case of offences not punishable with death. Ii also made it incumbent upon the Court to grant bail to an accused person in such a contingency. The accused‑petitioner in this case is alleged to have committed offence under sections 408, 419, 420, 467/468 and 471, P.P.C. and section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, which are not punishable with death. He was arrested in this case on 18‑5‑1985. Obviously, therefore, a period of more than a year had not elapsed since then. Grant of bail to the accused‑petitioner on the ground of delay in the conclusion of trial for a continuous period of time less than one year from the date of arrest would obviously be irk violation of the said clear provision of law and would be without Jurisdiction. I, therefore, reject this bail application.
H.A.K. Bail refused.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer