Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 1835 2005 SLD 1835 2005 PLD 112
Peshawar High Court
High Court Petition No. 1585 of 2004, decided on 24thFebruary, 2005. DATE of hearing: 13th January, 2005
NASIR-UL-MULK, C.J. AND MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J
Muhammad Habib Qureshi for Petitioner. Pir Liaqat Ali Shah, A.A.G. for
Respondents

Mst. PARVEENVsGOVERNMENT OF N.W.F.P. through Secretary Home and Tribal Affairs, Peshawar and 5 others

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 491,514,514(4)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 45

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 491 & 514---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 45---Habeas corpus petition---Forfeiture of surety bonds ---Remission---Entitlement--�Detenu who stood surety in thirteen different cases had furnished bail bonds as surety---Accused released on bail absconded in all the thirteen cases, and proceedings under S.514, Cr.P.C. were initiated against detenu by different Courts on different dates---Since detenu was unable to pay penalty imposed in any of the cases, he was imprisoned for various terms on different dates---Period of detention in eight cases had expired whereas in remaining cases detention period had yet to be completed---Since order of imprisonment under S.514(4), Cr.P.C. against detenu was not made in consequence of conviction, it could not be termed as sentence---Prisoner .imprisoned by order under S.514(4), Cr.P.C. was not entitled to be benefited from remission granted either under Prison Rules or by order of President of Pakistan under Art.45 of Constitution---Detenu though was not entitled to remissions claimed by him, but in circumstance of case it was directed that his period of imprisonment in cases that he had been detained under orders made under S.514(4), Cr.P.C. would be considered to run concurrently and not consecutively and in five remaining cases period of detention had yet to expire on the basis that periods of imprisonment were considered to run consecutively---Period of imprisonment imposed in favour of said cases, was six months each and one month in one case---Taking the period of imprisonment concurrently, last period of imprisonment of six months had already expired---Superintendent of Jail was directed to set detenu at liberty. Mahabir Singh v. Emperor AIR (3) 1944 Calcutta 17 ref.JUDGMENT NASIR-UL-MULK, C J.---This Constitutional petition in the nature of habeas corpus has been filed by Mst. Parveen, wife of Gul Rehman, the detest; detained at Central Jail, Peshawar. The detenu had furnished ball bonds as sureties in a number of cases in different Courts in Nowshera. In 13 of such cases the accused released on bail absconded and, therefore, proceedings under section…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register