Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2007 PCRLJ 547
Court / Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court
Year of Decision: 2006
Decision Date: 2006-07-27
Parties: SHAHBAZ ALI vs SHAHBAZ SARFRAZ and another
This judicial decision was delivered by the Lahore High Court on 2006-07-27. The matter involves proceedings between SHAHBAZ ALI and SHAHBAZ SARFRAZ and another, officially reported as 2007 PCRLJ 547. The court reviewed applicable Pakistani statutes, procedural requirements, and governing case-law authorities. The full text below contains the complete facts, arguments, and legal reasoning rendered by the honorable bench.
Case cited as 2007 PCRLJ 547
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi Title: SHAHBAZ ALI vs SHAHBAZ SARFRAZ and another Case No.: Criminal. Miscellaneous No,2411/CB of 2006 Date of Judgment:2006-07-27 Reported As: 2007 P Cr. L J 547 Result: Application dismissed
Judgment ORDER ' SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.-- The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks cancellation of bail of respondent No,1 which was granted to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore vide his order, dated 3-2-2006 in F.I.R. No,353, dated 19-8-2005. The said F.I.R. Was registered at Police Station Samanabad, Lahore under sections 420, 468 and 471, P.P.C. 2. According to the F.I.R. The allegation against the respondent was that he prepared in collusion with co-accused Muhammad Aamar, Muhammad Nawaz and Ch. Bilal Ahmad a forged document to sell. 3. According to 'the learned counsel for the petitioner the learned Additional Sessions Judge granted post-arrest bail against the law and facts of the case. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under:-- "From the perusal of record and above discussed facts, it reveals that prima facie no authenticated document bearing the signatures of allegedly executant has been sent for comparison. The factum of non-issuance of stamp paper as alleged by the complainant is matter of record and can be decided during trial. The offence under section 420, P.P.C. Is bailable while offence under sections 468 and 471 is not cognizable which requires permission by the Illaqa Magistrate and no such permission has been sought for to take up the investigation." 4. I have heard the learned counsel and also perused the record The above mentioned three grounds which won favour with the learned Additional Sessions Judge are neither, factually nor legally correct. The record shows that duly authenticated papers were sent for the comparison of the signatures. Similarly, sections 468 and 471, P.P.C. Were applied along with section 420, P.P.C. In such cases, where cognizable and non-cognizable offences are applied together or provisions of
---
## Page 2
Pakistan Penal Code are attracted together no permission of the Magistrate is required. 2004 PCr.L.J387. 5. However, there is no complaint that the respondent has misused the concession of bail. The Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan has repeatedly observed that once a bail is granted, it should be recalled only on exceptional grounds and it also amounts converting acquittal into conviction. Thus, this bail application to recall order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 3-2-2006 is dismissed.