Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SHAKIR ALI VS Respondent: THE STATE
1988 P Cr
1988 P Cr. L J 2001
[Lahore]
Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J
SHAKIR ALI and another‑‑Petitioners
versus
THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3488/B of 1987, decided on 19th December, 1987.
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 307 & 148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Statutory delay in conclusion of trial‑‑Desperate and dangerous criminal‑‑Accused involved in 7/8 criminal cases of murderous assault, theft and keeping unlicensed arms‑‑Such desperate and dangerous criminals, held, could not claim bail as a matter of right‑‑Bail refused in circumstances.
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 307 & 148/149‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Statutory delay‑‑Accused in jail for more than 2 years‑‑Delay not attributable to accused‑‑Accused involved in only one theft case‑ Bail granted in circumstances.
Sardar M. Latif Khan Khosa for Petitioners.
Irshad Ahmad for the State.
ORDER
This is an application for grant of bail to Shakir Ali and Sardar Ahmad petitioners in a case under section 302/307/148/149, P.P.C. registered at P.S. Arifwala, vide F.I.R. No. 47, dated 25‑2‑1985.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioners and 4 others in furtherance of their common object caused the death of Bagh Ali and Muhammad Ali on 25‑2‑1985. The earlier bail application i.e. Criminal Miscellaneous No. 663‑B of 1985 for grant of bail to the petitioners was dismissed on merits on 24‑7‑1985. The present petition has been filed on the ground of statutory delay in the conclusion of trial.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were arrested on 25‑2‑1985 and the trial has not concluded without any fault on the part of the petitioner. Conversely, the learned counsel for State has opposed this application.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I feel inclined to accept the application partly. Although more than two years have passed since the arrest of the petitioners yet Shakir Ali cannot claim bail as a matter of right because he seems to be a desperate as well as dangerous criminal. He stands involved in 7/8 criminal cases on the charges of murderous assault, theft and keeping unlicensed arms. As for Sardar Ahmad there is only one theft case against him and as such; he cannot be termed as hardened, desperate of dangerous criminal. He is in jail for more than 2 years and the delay in the trial has not been occasioned by his act or omission or by any other person acting on his behalf. He is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Pakpattan. The application to the extent of Shakir Ali petitioner is dismissed.
S.A. /S‑272/L Order accordingly.