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 Revision No. 553 of 1986, decided on 6th May, ,1987.
---S.497(5)--Bail, cancellation of--Petitioner allowed exemption from personal attendance on account of his ailment but after some time Trial Court recalled orders regarding exemption and directed petitioner to put in personal appearance--Petitioner, however, failed to appear In person and produced medical certificate evidencing his inability to Attend Court on account of his serious ailment--Trial Court nevertheless disregarding such medical certificate proceeded to cancel orders whereby petitioner was admitted to bail by High Court and issued coercive processes in form of non-bailable warrants for procuring his attendance--Bail allowed by High Court, held, could not lawfully be cancelled by Trial Court and Trial Court at the most could proceed against petitioner tend his sureties by forfeiting the amount of their bail bonds--Impugned order of Trial Court set aside in circumstances.
This order shall dispose of two Criminal Revisions viz. Criminal Revision No. 553 of 1986 and Criminal Revision No. 554 of 1986 between the same parties, namely, Syed Dawood Raza v. the State involving common question of law and facts.
2. The petitioner Syed Dawood Raza is involved in two criminal cases, one arising out of F.I.R. No. 133 of 1982, in case of Criminal Revision No. 553 of 1986 and the other arising out of F.I.R. No.14 of 1983, in case of Criminal Revision No. 554 of 1986. He is facing trial in both the cases before the learned Special, Judge (Central), Lahore.
3. On 9-5-1983, the petitioner was admitted to bail by this Court in both the cases. Such orders were passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 888-B-83 and Criminal Miscellaneous No. 935-B-1983.
4. During the course of his trial, for sometime the petitioner was allowed exemption from personal attendance on account of his ailment. Subsequently, the order regarding his exemption was recalled by the learned trial Court and the petitioner was directed to put in personal appearance. He failed to appear in both the cases on 28-10-1986. A medical certificate was produced evidencing his inability to attend the Court on account of serious ailment. The learned trial Court, however, cancelled the orders whereby the petitioner was admitted to bail by this Court and issued coercive measures in the form of non-bailable warrant for procuring his attendance. The aforementioned orders dated 28-10-1986 have been called in question through the present Criminal Revisions.
It has been conceded by the learned counsel for the State that orders allowing bail to the petitioner passed by this Court could not lawfully be cancelled by the trial Court. He could of course, proceed against the petitioner and his sureties by forfeiting the amount of their bail bonds. The manner in which the learned trial Judge has disregarded the medical certificate produced on behalf of the petitioner on the date of hearing to show his inability to attend the/ Court cannot also be endorsed.
6. In the above circumstances, both the under consideration Criminal Revisions are allowed and the impugned orders dated 28-10-1986 passed in both the cases by the learned trial Court are set aside. The petitioner, however, is directed to put in appearance before the learned trial Court on 11-5-1987, a date of hearing already fixed in the said learned Court in the cases against him, so that the prosecution evidence is recorded and the old criminal cases pending against him are decided
M.Y.H./D-16/L Revision allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer